AceJc~y FOR INTWANATION AL 0XVIES-Opm E4Ir AID USE ONL Y WASI.IN C T ON. D. C. 203.23 1RD BIBLIOGRAPHIC INPUT SHEET

I. WU1JECT Food production and nutrition r.LASSI. - AE50-0000,G352 F I C A T IO N 3.F ' ( r)A PID y Rural sociology- Central Ameri a I _ 2. TITLE ANO SUBTITLE A user's inventory of data sources on rural poverty in Central America

3. AUTHOR(S) Dommren ,A.J.

4- DOCUMENT DATE I. NUMBER OF PAGE 5 6. ARC NUMBER 1976 6 I11 4_RCp. " 7. REFERENCE ORGANIZATION NAME AMO ADDRESS

Dommen * ii

8. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES (SpOnoering Ot ahhsAton, Publiahw., A aIbilisfy)

9. ABSTRACT

ze sercs an '7rtrw: ata souz es Ame~a (Ccsz cr.th rual fc:C ntr - 2aa-a (7nalaI f2 .1: ondurcas i '-he rural c r 2thsecunzries '-!uate~'na. reners of refers to subs iste.en,, : faiers, sha-c.sn r er z SD as. .. and suear ...... s On COttCF caU esne, 'e h,, d a f'tv-atr-abl!-ne ...... •...... tona , r 7 - sed and references a a to ,e r r annan e dat u+s and t(e2) :bcat::rs dare tro-vi*:-e a...-.. 9...... un on co=-= .r;-t r -7.

TO. CONTROL NUMBER PN-AAG-241 $. P,41 k" D1CJYENT . ______

Cent ~ * *I ______Da3t * J!t*

______A USER'S INVENTORY OF DATA SOURCES

ON RURAL POVERTY IN CENTRAL AMERICA

Arthur J. Dommen Agricultural Economist

Prepared for the Age-ncy for International. Development under Contract No. otr-47-6060 "The o;ily thing they (-the local politicians] know about campesinos is what they see when they ride by in their big cars." --- A Honduran peasant woman (196, p. 133)

"It's hard doing farm surveys. You have to walk'" ---Dr. Damon Boynton, interview, TABLE O? CONTENTS

I Introduction Page 1 II Expzrma u:ory Not(s 6 III The Var. d) s 14 IV The Sourlsu'; 32 V Locat-ion of- Printed Sources 91 VI Locaon )f Data 94 VII Sources of Data on the Conditions of Estate and jLaintaLion Workers 96 VIII A Note on Dat. Processing Faci]. t es 98 IX A Note on Land Registry in Cetral America 101 X The SIECA Project List of Variables 104 INTRODUCTION 2.

The inventory of data sources that follows is the product of a trip through , Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala from February 13 to March 24, 1976. The object of the trip, broadly put, was to find out what we know about the conditions of life of the rural poor---their income, their work, their use of land, their diet, their sch.oling, their health, their life expectancy, and so forth. There was no expectation of finding one source of information about all these things, for none exists. N :vertheless, various people in their own ways have been investigating one or more of these things and thqir relationship to each other; the sum total of their research is impressive. A great work of analysis remains to be done, and it is desirable that the generation of data, facilitated by modern means, not be a.lowed to

outrun thn work of analysis.

The assignment conjured up at the outset the question: Who are the rural poor? Perhaps the most easily conjured-up vision is of the "subsistence farmer" ekinq out a living for himself and his family from a milpa on a steep hillside. Indeed, he is part of the picture. His way of life has not changed much from that of his Classical Maya ancestors, who proceeded in the following steps in their cycle of cultivation of corn: 3

1. Localization of the field; 2. cleaning out: of the underbrush; 3. cutting dowr of thn trees; 4. burnirg of the cuaa n; 5. sowing the seed; 6. looking after the AVAo d; 7. cutting woods in th, i (1, 8. bendinu of tha stum':n (in s-ome places); 9. harvesting the arly corn (in the ear); 10. harv' int tl t' coun; 11. putti n . th. corn in storage (and shellinq in some places); 12. distribtion to family, relative.su, and community.

The sarme de;script i n of thc cycle of crop and ocupation

could be aplind in mr. places of- Cntra Amercar today. nut

o.ther groups o pe..la,we'i. s 1 hav'.e cometoa be i.n lcuddo in the

picture a-f whqt we talk of as the .rural poor. Sor:iu are rentor s of land facing riinr 1land val ues and ents. Others are share­ croppers facing evicti-in as agrarian relatiaons change . Some are wage laborers on cot ton and suar caneusa te-s. How wuLl off are they? Sr:e potentially Ailium i.n y research is under way, for instance, to test the hypothesis that the wage 'rker children have a more ade.quate diet than the "subs:,stence farmer' s. "

John Becker, of USAID,Nicaragua, one of the many people on my trip with whoa I discussed the problem of rural poverty, / suggested that th problem of escaping from the vicious circle of poverty, insofar as the small farmer is concerned, he .looked at in terms of offering him a choico which he now does not have. The idea is an interesting one, I think. The small. farmer is constrained by his low ability to bear risk to put: more than an optimum proportion of his land, labor and o.hpr resource; into growing corn and beans, the staplie crops of "subsi stence agriculture." 4. In this view, helping the farmer to break out of the vicious circle wnould involve widening hi s choice of alter­ natives, allowiny him to vary his cropI-ng pat.utrn from the layrgo aounLt o f corn and beans he has been forced to plant becauso of his pred ica::ent. Such wi c c" choice might be achLved by making the resources at hiq disposal. more procluchiU. , or by makiny new resources ava.la.ble to him (new plant techno].ogy, a governm{n grain, '-tabili zation scheme, etc.). This view is entirely consistent wich recint theoretical

discussion s which have tended to look at the "subsistence

farmer's" choices in terrms of a problem of risk alleviation in the face of severe pu nalties attached to the wrocng decisions. The collection and analys is of data on the rural poor may help us to cnmpensate for the advannage of long experience which is ,a ter all, the exclusive possession of che "subsistence farmer" and the other members of the rural pcor. With them, we may achieve some understanding. The banality "The poor are always with us" applies here, too. The historical perspective aforded by works like David Brow;ni.ng's study of man and land in 71 Salvador (originally published in English, and now available :in a Spanish translation published by an enlightened Ministry ofl Education, San Salvador) hel1 p us bettc:r to understand the task confronting men in air conditioned of ices in noisy, crowded, and polluLed metropolises as they attempt to come to grips with land tenire, servitudes, technology, custom, and other legacies of the not-;o-disLant past. 5.

This report contains a short note on the methodology followed in compili ng the invc-ntory , then the inventory itself, followed by brief< nots on sources of data on conditions of est'ate and plantation 'workers not otherwise included, land reg istry, data process in capabiliti.es in the Central American countries, and a recent att :eijt b"

SIECA to construct aprofile of rural, man vhich has in­ volved as its first step a review of the data sources rather similar to my own ,effort..

I an4 grateful for assistance rendered and exchanges of views in the course of my trip on the part of the many people with whom I talked.

iMedardo Mejia, Historia de Honduras. I: Sociedad Pri-mitiva Prdcolombina -J-aT'a TyT?iec:rfi L Ajf de, 1969) , p. 83. II

EXPLANATORY NOTES What follows is an inventory intended for users of data on the rural poor of Cent:,rl America. I have chosen to arrange it by vaiabls r ' , by sources or t: hei r type (fully cogni zant of the act thu. ini doillo so I am leaving myself open to criticisr:"j.C.an I o1 the n4e- choice of certain variabs for inc]us.U.c: on , i nq' he vs out) for th . oowi no.. ..a .- (I) T thi.n. it i' ; more Functional from the user's point of v:o ; (2) It' provi des - cocWise way of conveving a rat he !1-ie onnt v o diveisc.c [nformation with a ma:imu--. of und- _stoad oh, I t' (3) the method would seem to be scs, . ;:1 .],ion-"tih1 to any country or group of countries, an cn . be computerized if judged necessary . ALI: 1,r] y n this inventory the variables precede the sources.

None of these v:;riables: is intended to be a measure of the condition of rural poverty in and of itselcf, obviously.

While knowing the cistance a farm is located from the nearest road may te.l us somethinq about the likelihood the family's child ron o to s cool (and there fore somethiing about the whole nexus of)ionscon(-j that en.an; from education or l.ack of it) there may be other more .mortant factors at work i. n the situation. A non edge of rural, poverty must iflol: from some combination of the va:riables.

In general, - have tried to stay as close as possible to defining the variables in their simplest form. Since, however, efficiencies are to be gained from combining "crude" 8. variables into more meaningful ones based on functional

relationshLps, I have made this combination in some cases.

For instance, data on home consumption of product by product

by size category of operational holding (for which we need "crui " data on at least two variables) tells us a bit more

about wel].-beinq of a population than simply home consumption of product per operational holding. Similar observations can

be made about Food purchases by level of income rather

tha. simply by household, and many other such pairs.

Some of these variables in "crude" form can be used to

derive a largc number of functional variables (e.g. the cropping pattern variable, properly measured, can give us the

percentage of cultivated land under "subsistence" and cash crops, another useful bit of information), so there is a

trade-off here. I have attempted to strike a middle course, neither losing many "crude" variables nor clutterinq up the inventory with many derived variables of few entries each.

It is a sinqul ar paradox that while the ultimate usefulness of this inventory must depend on the decipher ing of cause and effect relat.ionships among the variables, great care must be used in a t rd Wt n. cause and of LucL to the variables listed in : isolatki: ou . For instance, a rise in the incidence of squatting is not neccssarily an indication of a deterioration in social relations, a driving-down to subsistence, a rise in the sealeu of poverty. For example, in Costa Rica in recent years squatters have come in to lands owned by the banana companies. 9.

There, they often grow vegetables and sell them to the workers on the banana plantations. Squatt ing is accepted in Costa Rica as the consequence it is of the di fficulty of registering land titles legally by individuals. As this example shows, there are several benefits from his pr)cess:

(1) transfer of use of land from growing bananas for emport to growing fresh veqetables in an area of veotable scarcity;

(2) income .geny tion of bane.t to otherw-is. landless, families; and (3) improvement in the n,,trit ienel status of the banana workers who use part of their salaries to purchase fresh vegetables. Similarly, a rise in the average wage for agricultural labor would not be interpreted as an improvement in the rural poverty situation if it coincides with a sharp rpluctio: in the number of available jobs.

Data relating to observations made of a single primary unit (e.g. one household) have been excluded from this listing.

An inventory of data sources, to be useful, must not simply be a listing o bibliographic or word-of-mouth references, but should be the end product of a careful inspection of data sources for their value. T:, tho- inventory which follows I have tried to list only data sources with which I was able, in my all too brief visits to the countries, to familiari ze myself personally. ! was thus able to weud out references that turned out on inspection to have 1 i 1.aral value to the investigator.

This pi ocedure has undoubhtdly cost ma a number of refe rence:­ that might be useful and I a:xpress my regret at this situation, unavoidable in th, circumstances. 10.

This is an inventory of data sources on rural poverty. The conditiorn.; and problems of the urban poor may have dif­ ferent manifestations from those of th" rural poor, but as long as govc rnments of the region pursue policies whose end result is the throwing off of the land of agricultural laborers (either due to unthinking subsidizatio7 of rapid mechanization or due to laws aimed at converting so-called "feudal" arrange­ mcnts of provision of meals or loan of ?lots of land for private cultivation in part or whole p.:yment of work to an all-cash basis ) we can safely say tha- the root problem facing the poor in these countries is the same, and no matter what one does to make the urban poor less poor there will always be more of them, given the high rates of increase of the rural poor and the attractions of moving to the cities. The inventory does not include studies criticizing the methodology of data generation, although some studies along this line are interesting in themselves.2

In the ,-urse of my trip T came across many persons, and many persons who know of many other persons, who affirmed they were doing research, to complete their thesis or in some other connection, in the field of rural poverty. Alas, it was not possible to obtain the details oc data collection involved in all these effo:Tts, no matter how wo rthy they seemed. Thus I have, with a single exception, avoide] listing theses in process, giving only words of encouragement to their authors. Furthermore, users are warned to take al. references

to surveys not actually comp ted wit: h the usual cautLion.

Currency of a].1 s uch p "-ians and projects i.i.as of the dit-o of my visit to the source. Sure}."s are notab ly subjct to the. whims of their supervi sors a nd comm it tes oi one kind and another

In one "nstance the relevant e sI: .i.nna re undr'.-t, subsr[antive change between the time o F M..' in to o. witihtV t manIh res)ons i ble and a re-check I made a few days later.

Mindful of the danger of. --o] i I:r tion of such so ces, ;1 very small number of secondary sources have been included in the inventor:v because they were judged to add a new: dimension to the primary data (as was the case with (215), e. .) and wer-e not simply tabulations or re-tabulations (w,.hi ch are.: useFul. when they are designed to mak:e a iint an are u.ed as bUi],.iucj blocks, but which often only seem ta create confusion and sometimes lend an ,nwarranteS authority to weak cx' draimadaLa).

Marketing studies, which in t,-hr' Central Am,rican countries contain much information about the economy of t hesmai], farmer's world, have not generally been included. An e::ample of a good study, however, is the one of staple grain marketing in Honduras done by F. F. Slaney and Co. Ltd. of Vancouver for the C(Inadian

International Dave.oopment Agency (CIDA) and the CONSJPLANI', published in February 1975- 2jmm]arly, epidemiolog en] studies

in rural areas of tn thr 1_wight on the eustoms ard ]i Fe styles of small farmers and landless ]aborers.

By the end ot my ti.ip, it became clear I was going to find little or no data on two data series I had included at the out­ set as being of relevance: household savings (V33) and

incidence of alcoholism (V124). I took the opportunity of

discussing this lack with persons of some experiencc in the

field. Dr. Robert E. Klein of INCAP, Guatemala, probably was

stating only the obvious when he said that his socioeconomic

research unit had decided not to include a question on household

savings in Lhe i r questionnaires because the subjeact was too

sensitive and might do damage to the rest of the daLt obtained.

Dr. Miguel Guzman of INCA? pointed out to me that it was

difficult enough to obtain reliable data on consumption of

water (needed, for instance, in studies of intake of micro

nutrients) without trying cio get reliable data on consumption

of alcoholic beverages. That is, the margin of error in the

data obtained (depending, one suppcses, on who the interviewee

is: hisband or wife) is simply too great to make the effort

worthwhile.

The following are, obviously, either/or pairs of variables:

V37 and V8 V71 and V72 or V73 V79 and V80 V106 and V107 V108 and V109 V129 and V130 V133 and V132

Note also that V73 data may complement V107 data, since household food censAmu t.ion sur veys, even if based on actual measurement, may be restricted to food consumption within the house. Also, V112 has been defined 7o as to avoid imputation of value of home-produced consumption, always a risky business. 13.

The collectic.- of reliable dat a on farm-gate prices

poses special p'ob].TIns in Cen tra 1. America. Under the pre.. va]ent systern of market.ng there. truckers Colnt:rac:f. to buy

farmers' production ahead o t he hirvest ani ofLen p y in advance as an inducement, a form of- ;_edi.c pro"'! ion. Lumlp­

sum payments tor pred' lctJ o o cern and beOanf are, c1m10on i.n

Nicaragua_ fhilIc cr:os are. still in the fieldo Te aIso -ire used for onions and other vege ta a l I eve nor t. ree< crops like avocado pears an Maingoes. Act:ual weih.in ,o other measurement of the ouantity of t', pr"aduice chaning htands in these circumstances is almost impossible

Data on infant mort-al ity (V126 ) included herein vary considerably in reliahi.lity since in the cases of some studies they, represent the rate calculated for the entire country population (censuses) and oE others for a single village or a village sample (eg. (122) is for a population of 29).

The references have bean aiven in no particular order, except that they are listed roughly in the order in which they were consulted.

Lastly, let ma proisnt. out that the inventory cannot pre­ tend to be cone. ch'e lye. Others will no doubt be able to think of data sources that: should be included, and notice of their add i.tions will he we comedI

1 As, for .tlance, a 1965 El Salvador law (Diario Oficia1 del Gohien.llo, San "-Ilvador , May 5, 1965) citfed b--y F-C)-roWIn1.11g. 2 E.g. Albe)crt G. IMadsen, "Dc ,s E Sl vador Auii . itu ra Ce n',; is of 1971 Reflect Current S.i. ze of! Farm Character--i. , i cf; :?' Salvador: USAID, Jan. 1975. III THE VARIABLES

Legend No underlining signifies a direct question or data responsive directly to the variable. x Can be calculated §ro data reported in available publication or parer. x* = Data apparently recorded but noL reported in available publication or paper.

14 Vl Number of members of household

4, 5, 1 * 13*, 73, 76, 84, 89, 99, 101., 1.04, 109, 115, 113.B, 121I, .12 . , 126, 135, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 146, 14S, 156, 15 ) , 161, 1(6, 170, 172, 176, 1))7, 173, 21,, .220, 221 , 21, 2-9,

242, 24t7, 252, 54 2 262.62, " 276 30, 3.

V2 Age co m osto[s i -. -li ' f the homisni'se : d

5, 1 73 , 1.01, 1'09, 11 1.18, 121, 122, .1. , . 3 1. 7, 13 , 140., 141, .42 145, 148, 158, 1 9 161, 166, -170, 172, 176, 177, 21.7, 219, 220, 221 231 230, ',42 2.47 -5, 254 258, 267, 308, 313.

V3 So' o p s t ,-." f tb~ i o &:rho! (, 39, 1(1­ 5, 7 3 44, 9, 9, 1 01, 10,1 109, 1.1,5 18 121, 122, 126, 135, A37, 1.38, 141, 1.42, 146, 143, 158, 159, 1.61, 166, 170, 172, 1.76, 1.77, 217, 21.9, 220, 221, 231, 239, 242, 247, 252, 254, 258, 267, 308, 31 _

V4 Per cent of ....- ploy d agricultural house­ holds in the sample (1)

62*, 76, 104, 135, 1.37, 142, 146, 159, 161, 216, 222. V1 Lad .... r . r1-,houschod1.d

4 , 1.2 13 51-59(),5, 63, 64, 76, 84, 89, 100, 101, 1.04, i(., 106, 107, 1.08, 115, 118, ]24, 138, 141., 17 , 180(2), 1. 3, 203(2), 221, 239.

V6 Tand .... i( . '. u .- . (3

4, .1,- ,1 , , - 10 , 100,06,, 107, 115, 11 1 1 7" .11.0 2.1.1, 0 .15,1. 212,59, 161, 171.,1 7 7 , 1 , 7L 1 , 210, 21. 216, 219 , '' 2 2 9, '". 5, 262 31 3

, V7 Propot' ion (o-) r c r io-( -,, . I . , n,: r(.:ritLod in

125, 1.27, 129, -132 , 1 1 1. 171, - 174, 175, 178, 210, 211, 21.6, 21 j, 22-, 29, 242, 31.3. 16.

V8 Landlord's address (4)

137, 174, 175.

V9 Absen L(OL landlord?

173.

V10 Land operated that is communal

262.

Vl. Size of op( rational holding

4, 32, ), 34 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 60, 62*, 76 84, 89, 101, 104, 106, 107, 11.5, 118, 124, 125 1 - 22, 1- 0, 140, 158, 167, 171, 173, 174, 175, 178, 179 , 1..80 181., R, , 1 , 184, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, -1-6, 219 :20, 21, 23,9, 212, 262, 267, 269, 3, 4 ,- 01., 308 , 313.

VI2 Land rcn tc u houseo hold

4, 76, 89, 1.01, 104 , 106, 107, 124, 135, 137, 158, 162, 171, 1.73, 178, 181, 239. V13 Estimate cf viable si-ze of farm to support one family

65*, 132, 195, 09 19.

V14 Number of fr,-"mernts Ter oporational holding

4, 84, 118, 125(5), 127(5), 128(5), 138, 158, 171, 175, 178, 180(6), 181, 210, 211, 213, 214, 216, 222, 239, 262.

VI5 Ratio of total cultivated land to adult males in the sample (7)

137, 180. V16 Percentage of landless households in the sample (8)

4, 76, 81, 89, 104, 1.32, 135, 137, 142, 158, 15), 161, 195, 2.5, 221.

V17 Number of at tached laborers (mozos ceolonos) per operdtiona1n ho]1ding

210.. 17.

VI8 Land hunger, general description by locality

65*, 75, 132, 195, 306. V19 Prevalence of sharecropping, general description of magnitude by loca ity

65*.

V20 Change in prevalence of sharecropping: 5-year time period, general description of magnitude by locality

65*. V21 Incidence of sharecropping per rational holdinj

4, 84, 89, 118, 135, 138, S9, 16.1, 178, 239, 262.

V22 Prevalence of squatting: general description of magnitude by locality 65*, 75, 132, 195, 196.

V23 Change in prevalence of squatting: 5-year time perid, general description of magnitude by locality 65*.

V24 Incidence of squatting per operational holding 4, 173, 239.

V25 Passan; ot land into foreigners' hands: 5-year time period, general dexcription of magnitude by locality 65*.

V26 Lack of deeds to attest land ownership: general des­ cription of magnitude by locality or by country

65*, 199.

V27 Conversion of cultivated land te grazing land: general description by locality

65*, 191. 18. V28 Conversion of farm land to recreational development: general description by locality

65*. V29 Con-l idLt. inn of small holdings into large holdings: general de:crij)Lion hy locality 65* 195. V30 Degree of concentration of landholding 4, 76, 89, .106, 107, 125, 127, 128, 171, 174, 175, 195, 210, 211, 221, 259 .

V31 On-farm storuge facilities

101, 120, 130, 136, 221, 262. V32 Quantity of staple grain in storage on farm

89, 136, 140, 178(9), 221, 239(9). V33 Amount of savings (in money or precious me.tal) per household

Nil V34 Lives L_.: inventory per operational holding 4, 6, 12*, ]3* 16, 76, 84, 104, 106, 107, 115, 118, 12 , 127i--, 128, 130, 13.-, 133, 158, 162, 171, 173, 174, 175, 173, 180(6), 181, 182, 184, 210, 211, 212, 214, 216, 220, 221(10), 2 22, 239 , 242,248, 2 6 67 313.

V35 Amount of debt per household 12*, 13*, 1.58, 170, 178, 208(6), 239, 267, 272(6).

V36 Credit yes/no

12*, 3 73, 101, 135, 137, 155, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 171, 178, IS0, 184, 196, 208, 216(11), 222(11), 239, 242, 26-2, 67, 69, 271, 27 , 274, 275, 308, 313. V37 Ident: ifi cation of sources of credit by type 65*, 72, 73, 77, 84, 101, 115, 118, 137, 155, 184, 2 02. 19.

V38 Identification of sources of credit, by type and aMO U11t

7, 125, 1.35, 136, 158, 159, 160, 1.61., 171, 178, 180, 201", 239, 242, 267, 308.

V39 P-centage ,OF hoS scs in com.iiumnity having running 1%wat or-I

* 9, 1-2 * , 7 , 103, 101, 110, 115, 1.20, 121, 129, 137, .141, 14A, 1,I 15 9-, 170, 172, 210, 221, 247, 253, 255, 2 2, 312.

V40 Percentacic o". hou00, in commo2Un lty havi.ng f].ushing toi-LetL

9, 12", i3", 103, 104, 110, 115, 120, 121, 129, 137, 141, 144, 146 , 158, 159, 170, 1.7/2, 178, 210, 221, 247, 253, 255, 262, 312.

V41 Percentage o S houses in conmunitLy having electricity

9, 12", 13- 104, 110, 120, 121, 129, 137, 141, 144, 146, 158, 1 )70,172, 21.0, 221, 24, 253, 25-55, 262, 312.

V42 Percontaof :.os n comunit ,,, hay in re.rigrator

66, 78, 104, 1.20, 1.21, - -29, 141, 46 158 170, 172, 210, 221, 253, 255, 312 .

V43 Sourc- of clr in ing ,.,i ­

65", 73, /b, 99, 104, 110, 103, 120, 121., 129, 137, 141, 144, 1,46, 155, 170, 172, 178, 206, 2.0, 221, 253, 255, 262, "'12).

V44 E].-ct iication of the co1 uni ty

65*, 7 , 110, 115, 1.20, 121, 129, 144, 155, 172, 221, 27, 253, 255, 26, 312. V45 Do.crition of ,he 1tar by physical aspect

12" 3" ( 2 , 04, 110, 1.15, 120, 121, 129, 137, 141, 144, I46, 25, 1 , 1.70, 1.72, 178, 206, 210, 220, 221, 24f7, 253, 255, 22, 308.

V46 Descr ietio,: ,.of bybh,..1t:r subjective aspect (good, average , bad) 12*, 13*, 65*, 1.96. 20.

V47 Intensity of ,gricultural input use by quantities by crop (I i npu t. -. m'-cCtC' ! and and .1 br)

3, 4, 12' , 1 -) ,, 3 ,75, 3-) ,8 39, 40, 41, 2 4 4, l 1 , 1 1 1, 2I 14, 118, 124, 125(I,) , P (I 1 -1,1'1, 158, 167, 1.7 3, / 22, 223, 239, 21.', ,2( 2, , 9 3, 271, , 2i:32

V4 8 I.Ip' I ' ;: Fcr-t I e - , rr-:t-, i.cisr etC

20, 27, 30, 13(6, 15 161, 67, 178 , 197, 198, 239, 212, 2.

V49 .r -it 1 d;: (.rteratic. .- hold inc.

4, 84, 104, 10?, -11, 125, 127, 128, 130, 135, 159, 161, 162, 171., 1.74, 17, 180(6), 181, 210, 211, 213, 216 , 219,,22 242

V50 Privaite- o,,. coiw,-inal irrigation system

128, 162.

V51 Input pricr:: irrigation charge pr unit area

84, 118, 135, 1.36, 162, 17R(15) , 197, 239(15), 308.

V52 Inpuit prices value of land

65*, 89, 137, 155, 162, 178, 197, 208, 216, 221, 222, 239, 2739.

V53 Input prices: change in value of land: 5-year time per iod 65*. C5nu V54 Input: prices:apcshange inland rent vleo ad -ertm

84, 89, 101, 1.18, 124, 132, 135, 137, 140, 141, 155, 158, !59, 161, 178, 197, 216, 220, 222, 239, 308.

V55 Input prices: land rent

138

V56 Input prices: sharecropping rate by crop

124, 178, 213, 216, 222, 239, 242. 21.

V57 Input prices: days of work in payment of rent per unit area

216, 222.

V58 Input prices: size of privai e plots whose use is granted to attached laborers (moyos colonos): total size per operational hoiding

210.

V59 Input prices: cost of inputs furnished by landlord spec Fied in monetary terms in case of land rent or sharecropping rate

178, 239.

V60 Input prices: interest rate paid to private monu:y­ lenders

7, 65*, 73, 77, 135, 136, 158, 160, 161, 242.

V61 Hired labor/family labor dichotomy specified

84, 118, 120, 130, 111, 158, 171, 174, 175, 178, 180, 185, ! 6, 197, 216, 21Y, 219, 222, 223, 239, 242, 246, 267, 269, 271, 273, 02, 313.

V62 Permanwnt/canal hired labor dichotory specified

130, 158, 173, 174.

V63 Agricultural labor force per operational holding specified by age and sex, family and hired

125, 127, 12816), 130, 135, 159, 161, 175, 219, 313.

V64 Participation in agricul]:iral labor force of members of household (per cent)

5, 1.3 , 62*, 71, 7, 24, 80, 101, 104, 118, 120, 135, 137,-141,-159, ". 1 , 2162, 21R, 219, 222, 223, 267, 313.

V65 Durati.on of .r-...... work by nrrhers of household (hours per ri porn rod)

5,1, 249, 62, 73, 234, 4, 1, 13 159, 161. 178, Y16 --218, 22 ,7223 , 23 9, 242, 246(17), 250, 313. 22.

V66 Duration of off-farm work (hours per reporting period)

62*, 73, 135, 137, 158, 159, 161, 178, 216, 218, 222, 223, 239, 246(17).

V67 Perceive(.. demand for agricultural wage labor

65*, 73, 84, 118, 120, 130, 1.55, 195, 313.

V68 Seasonality of agricultural wal labor

155, 195, 197, 220, 221., 24C6, 313.

V69 Origin of migratory agricultural laborers

173, 220, 221, 246, 262, 281. V70 Estimated labor input ronuiremont coefficient per crop 48, 99(18), 10](18), 131, 136, 138(18), 158, 160, 162, 178, 185, 18t, -1.97, 2 2,219,18 219, 222, 2-3,2-250, 2 271-., 3 0 , 3 1 . . . - - . . ',9

V71 i apot onn: 'a o ra l (und ffo-. I atd) 5, 13, 73, 81, 101, I l, 1.12, 1_13, 114, 124, 135, 136, 138,-133, 1.39, 161, 162, 173, 180, 1.97, 221, 262, 267, 269, 271, 300, 313.

V72 Iaput pric-s wage rae ( in Cas 17, 62*, 65' 84, 3S9, .. 3, 132, 167, 178, 216, 218, 220, 222, , 2 i2,46, 253.

V73 Input prt n ..id and/or services)

17, _6,2 , o,,. , 113, 1.32, 167, 178, 216, 218, 220, 2 22, -) 26 5 824.6(1

V74 Totil <' ust' on 10, 16, 2 8", 30 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, *4 , 1E, , 60, 74, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 90, 0., 1-, 1 i', 113, 114, 135, 136, 137, 142 , 150, 160, 161, 162, 239, 250, 260, 267, 273, 299,163, 367,313. 170, 178, 10, 197, 23.

V75 Cropping pattern

12*, 13*, 84, 101, 104, 106, ]07, 108, 1.1, 112, 1113,1]., 115, 113, 120, 121, 124, 125, .27 1-2, 130, 132, .15,-36, , IA, isR, 59, '161, .1:,.67, 170, 171, 17.3, 171, '7.,178, 1 3 , ].8", ] , 211,] 'IA, 212, 22, )i 2 9, 2, 22 11 , 2,2 21',)239, 242, 2 ,14, ._ , <, '(,7 4 275, 308, 21_.

V-1,6 In ' '' <' 'iLI(1 L' I)opy CY(-Ire- Sown [.0 :Lo C ",.;)

125, .1-2- , 1.32, 136, 1.67, 17 , 181, 210, 211, 212, 213 216, 220, 221 22 ', 242, 27.1, 275, 313.

V77 Chgt:2 in cropping pattorn

65* 124

V78 Major ,_ops of the conununity

155, 206, 313.

V79 Area har-este, by crop per operational holding

2, 3, 4, 32, 33 34, -5, 36, .7, 3 , 39, 40, 42, 43, 414,--10 - i7 , -r6 IL-07- 12i- 1. _ 1-+7 .27, 128,-130, 131(1 ), i, /, 13,,, '1 , 9, 161, 162, 173, 174, 175,1 " I .. - 7) ). ')11 .2 1.; 216, 218, 219, 220 , 22),12 2',, .:'.I8(' , -67, 269(20), 27 0 (2 271 ( ' 2- 4 7

V80 Ar a -'' - r'-, -. ,

60, 84, 10 , 11.11 112, .13 1.1, 115, 118.

V8l '",+,,,r of c .. C, 1.ants rejuvenated in year of referece

125, 173, 175, 179.

V82 Age classes of cof-o: plants

128, 1.73, 175, 179.

V83 Average yil by crop (unweinhted)

2, 3, 4, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 60, 84, 101, 104, 107, 108, 11.8, 124, 125, 127, 128, 130, 132, 135, 1.36, 1.55, 1.5 , 159, 1.60, 161, 162, 173, 178, .197, 2.0, 211, 212, 21.3, 216, 218, 219, 220, 221., 222, 223,23, 24, .48, 262, .6, 267, 273, 274, 275, 01- -IA-.. 24.

V84 Average yield by crop (weighted by farm size)

4, 12", 13", 84, 1.8, 125, 127, 178, 239, 242.

V85 Yield variability by crop (time series)

138, 197, 262.

V86 Fa-m-cate prices (non-liv.stoc:)

12*, 13*, 21, b3 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 41, 42, 43, 44, 50, 1.-.-, 119, 124, 132, 136, 138, 141, 155, 156, 157, 158, 160, 162, 168, 170, 173, 178, 197, 206, 216, 218, 220, 221, 222, 223, 239, 248, 256, 265, 267, 308.

V87 LivesLock prices in selectod markets

6, 141.

V88 Marketing of livestock by selected markets

6.

V89 Farm-gate price seasonal.ity by crop or type of livestock

33, 34, 65* 84, 118, 160, 162, 173, 197, 248.

V90 Calendar of sales of output by household

138, 160, 173, 197, 248.

V91 Farm-gate price variability by crop (time series)

197.

V92 Farmer's subjective evaluation of riskiness of production by crop

84, 138, 138.

V93 Farmer's subjective evaluation of previous three years as good or bad 178 V94 Farmer's subjective evaluation of risk involved in "borrowing money for the crops"

262 25.

V95 Moisture Availability Index (MAT)

29.

V96 Distance farm-market

12*, 13*, 101, 108, 121, 122, 141, 173, 197, 242, 249.

V97 Distance farm-motorable road

178, 239, 242.

V98 Travel time to the next largest town

65*, 73, 76, 120, 242, 508.

V99 Farm income (gross or net) ,pocified in monetary terms

16, ,.,62*, 84, 89, 118 32, 135, 137, 141, 142, 146, 158. 159, 161, 1C2, 167, 170, 178, 206, 219, 221, 239, 24-, 258, 267, 273, 303, 308, 313.

VI00 Maijor source of ferm incomie identified 12,, 135, 140 59 161, 1.62, 167, 170, 178, 221,

239, 242.

VI01 Off-farm income specified in monetary terms 62*, 84, 89, 118, 132, 135, 137, 133, 141, 142, 153, 1'9, 162, 170, 178, 216, 219, 221, , 9, 242 258, 308.

V102 Work e.:hance w: ith neighbors: number of days per year

138, 173, 2],, 222, 239.

V103 Days; eer perortin(

158.

V104 Days per reporting period spent in small trading

158

V105 Income (gross or net) earned from handicrafts, small trading, fishing, etc.

178, 2±6, 221, 222, 239, 302. 26.

V106 Home consumption of product by product (kg.) by size category of operational holding 4, 62*, 89, 1.04, 125(21.), .140, 158, 178, 181, 213, 221, 2.)91 242. VI07 ]Tioir colzSu. 't ion of product per household by product (k .) 4, 25* , 2 6', 62*, 1.01, 104, 124, 136, 138, 139, 158, 162, r17, ]10(22), 197, 220, 258, 267, 308, 313. V108 Total - p uitu.e y Piousehod for pivrchased food and fuel I urichased. Inputs, rent in c-,! h and k.i debt nd, oli.lion. , %.[Ct, and donia: o and replace­ mentt n usr.j-up sturac.Je of staples, and animal feed

89, 221(1 . V109 Sam-, as V1.08, but only counting cash expenditures

135, 137, 159, 161, 170. VlO Proportion of income divided between consumption and producL.ion expenses

101, 135, 137, 159, 161, 170, 258. Vii Percentag- of total household e:xpenditure devoted t, p-f celta]in groups of foods (e.cr. cereals and pu.

25* 2>; 102O ) .70, 258. V112 Percenta of total incone spent for food purchases 62*, 09, 135, 137, 15, .161, 170, 242, 258. V113 Estimated .o elasticities of demand of rural people 10-o, ddiff .erent cateoeI-jes of goods 207. V114 Intra-houcoeho.d distributi on of food consumption, by food groups, by age group

195. 27.

V115 Total calories in diet per capita per day by socioeconomic cla ss (h,wever defined)

8(?) , 66, 78, 83, 206.

VI16 Total gLrams of protein in diet per cap ita er day by socioeconomic class (howev;'cr defncd)

8(Q), 66, 78, 83, 206.

V117 Purchased onsum.ption and home-produced consumption (in kg.)

25*, 2 6*, 89.

V118 Total food consumption (kg.) by socioeconomic class (how ever d f i nad)

62*, 66.

V119 Frequency of consumption of meat, eggs, milk, f 4 h

62*, 66, 76, 78, 3, 99, 117, 120, 139, 140, 152, 170, 262, 308.

V120 Purchase prices of foodstuffs

78, 80, 89: 155(25), 158, 220, 221.

V121 Purchase price of firewood

79, 221.

V122 Household's awareness of an adequate diet

78.

V123 Nutrition.l well-being of members of the household (anthronc:a:try)

8, 11, 40, 66, 98, 152, 153, 154, )64, 165, 169, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 277, 314.

V124 incidence of alcoholism: general evaluation by locality

73, 103.

V125 Crude birth rate

31, 68, 104, 120, 121, 122, 126, 135, 137, 143, 159, 161, 166, 172, 176, 217, 231, 252, 254. 28.

V126 Infant mortality rate 31, 67, 104, 116, 120, 121, 122, 126, 135, 137, 143, .158, 159, 161, 166, 172, 176, 217, 231, 252, 254, 311. V127 Numbcov- of registered births per reporting period

69, 85, 1.53, 21.7, 227, 231, 235. V128 Number of registered dezaths per y.eporting period

69, 86, 153, 217, 227, )31l, 235.

V129 Literacy of adults in the household 5, 89, 104, 109, .-15, 126, 135, 137, 141, 146, 148, 158, 159, )61, 166, 172. 1.77, 217, 220, 221, 231, 252, 254, 258, 267.

V130 Literacy of the head of household only 12*, 13*, 1f, 101, 178, 239, 242, 246, 262, 276. V131 Ifiglist grade of school attained 1v each adult in hou soeho ( 5, 84, 39, 104, 109, 115, 118, 126, 141, 146, 148, 158, 150, ]1 16, 172, 177, 206*, 217, 220, 221, 231, 252, 25-1, 25% , 308. V132 Hlighest: cirnct ,- -chool attained by the head of househol y11'

x 62 , 99, 101 176, 178, 239, 246, 262. V133 Percent-aso rschool-goingo, children among girls of 5-14 age : 73, 8 , 11-' 1 .5 13/, 146, 158, 159, 161, 177, 217, 221 (262 2 " 2 254..

V134 PcFCIVOd :U,01for schooling 12*, - ] , .% S82 ,9 137, 158, 159, 196, 221, 225, '91, "37

V135 Tra\ci. time household-school

146. 29.

V136 Measure of non-formal education

115, 137, 138, 146, 148, 162, 194, 217, 221, 229, 231, 237, 246, 262, 264, 265, 266, 308.

V137 Travel time house-fields

221, 308.

V138 Distance vilaCTe-town

155, 228, 236.

V139 Rural-urban migration: 5-year time period, general description of magnitualv by localiLy

65*, 104 (27) , 195, 261.

V140 Rural-urbLn migration: 5 year time period, change of or0'laceresidence

172.

V141 Rural-urban migration: 2-ear time period, charge of place of residence

126, 141, 158, 166, 170, 217, 225, 231, 234.

V142 Rur-il-urhba1n .mirat Pon: 1-,e, time period, chance of laici

143, 158, 170, 176, 2 1 , 22C, 231, 234.

V143 Rural-urban n i-t : dsv;,:rn from the household Jo-0 1ha sec 135, 159, .161, 176, 22 2-;4. V144 Rural-urban rni rt on: dislacement of the whole household Lor whar'

158.

V145 Rural-rural migration

276, 280.

V146 Prevalence of cooperatives, campesino organiza­ tions, and/or labor unions

65*, 132, 137, 138, 141, 158, 259, 160, 178, 196, 208, 221, 239, 242, 246, 308. 30.

V147 Number of new latrines installed per reporting period

69, 1.51. V148 Number of houses improved per reporting period 69.

V149 Number of water pumps installed per reporting period

69, 151.

VI50 Main type of illness in the family

135, 137, 141, 151, 159, 311, 314. V151 Incidence of requirement of modern medical treatment 221. 31.

Footnotes

If other than 100 per cent. 2 Per collectivity. 3 Includes all forms of rental arrangements and colonato. 4 Permit; caiculation of incidence of absentee landlordism. 5. Within same nmni c inio. 6Pe~r col lo,:ti.vity. 7 In ca oq only whoe sample represents a meaningful gcgrepe' 1 eitv, such as a village or conmunity. 8T f. . 'Ia po: cont or n ,or c nit 9 Propor'tio o- each crop "kept tu be sold later. 0 1 Value only.

For rcd ctie use only. 12Manurc and fertilizer only. 13 Area co-or' d onmly. 14 lome-grown , sw', and chemical fertilizer only. Irrigation 1 oie costs aggregate. 16 No d'istintion M so. 17o

1EHi re l;,,:abor,. onl y.

Area ;,or'o (Krahn _ada). 20 Area sown. 2 1 Only for coffee. 22 celle v .Per, consumption, storage and waste ag­ gregated under "cons uionm and other.'' 23 Invesicgtor omittd to gyet dat a on number of agri­ cultural laborers employed, but says he could get these data retrospet-dvely 24 Purchasod foods lisied, but: nD total househol1 d ex­ penditure data e]1ici ted. 2 5 Bottled milk only. 2 6 Children age 6-16. 27 Only in case the person(s) moved from one municipio to another. IV

THE SOURCES

Legend QI = Questionnaire included. QNI = Questionnaire not included.

1 manzana = 0.69 hect re

32 33.

1. Costa Rica. Ministerio de Economla, Indu-itria y Comercio. Direcei6n General de Estadistica y Cenosos. Set:,undoInven­ tario de las Estadisticas Nacionales, RePrilica do Costa Rica, 1970. San Jose, 1972.

2. . Encuesta Agricola por Muestreo - 1969: Arroz, Frijol, Ma1z. San Jos6, Sept. 1969. Co-ordinated by Banco Central de Costa Rica. Coverage: national. Time frame: agricultural year 1 May 1968 - 30 April 1969, and forecasts for the following agricultural year. Method: direct interviews of faixmers. Sample: chosen from the following populations: "fincas grandes o especial­ izadas" (100 per cent sample), and "fincas peguen as (mayores de una manzana)". All data tabulated by "zonas," viz. "lechera; cultivos permanentes; cereales y ganaderia."

3. . Encuesta A r~cola por Muestreo en las Regiones Agrlcolas de Costa Rica, 1971: Arroz, Frijol, Maiz. San Jos6: Aug. 1972. Coverage: all census farms in country except those less than 0.7 ha., those located in census zones with less than 40 per cent rural population, and those located in District (hab. Indians, difficult of acce.-s). Time frame: agricultural year 1 May 1971 - 30 April 1972. All data were tabulated by six "agricultural regions." Sample: chosen from the following populations: "fincas especiales" (100 per cent sample), farms with less than 7 ha. rice and corn, less than 3.5 ha. beans (two-stage sampling process except for Pacfico Seco where three stages used; no per centage given, but appears to have been 1:20). Method: interviews of farmers.

4. Censos Nacionales de 1973. Agropecuario. Regiones Agricolas. San Jos6, June 1975. National census results. Time frame: agricultural year 1 May 1972 - 30 April 1973 except for some questions which refer to day of interview. Method: interviews of farmers. Data are tabulated by country as a whole and by seven "agri­ cultural regions." QI.

5. __ . Censos Nacionales de 1973. Poblaci6n. San Jose, 2 vols., Dec. 1974 and April 1975. National census results. Time frame: 14 - 19 May 1973. Tabulates participation in work force according to all persons of age 12 or more who worked at least one hour during the week of 7 - 12 May 1973. Defines literacy to be the ability to read i ;and write a simple paragraph in any idiom. QI.

6. Encuesta Pecuaria por Muestrco - 197b. San Jose, Sept. 1970. Time frame: 1 April 1970. 34. Marcoo. A. Escribano C. Credi o Rural: Algunos Aspectos. In tituto.o de Fomento y Asesoria Municipal (IFAM) Accion lnternacional and T6cnica, Division de Acci6n Inter­ national (,sic.) . San Jos6, Dec. 1975. Survey of a sample of 372 comunidades in 27 cantones in three regions of' Costa Rica. Method: interview with questionnaire. Sample was stratified by population size of the cominiidad as follows: (1) pop. less than 500; (2) pop. 501 - 2,000.: (3) pop. more than 2,000. 8. J. Valverde and J. Quir6s. Encuestas Nacionales en Costa Rica. ]nstituto Interamericano d Ciencias Agricolas de la OEA, 1972. A survey of food consumption and anthropometry for children 7-14 in 6 areas of Costa Rica. Includes food consumption and anthropometry for children aged 7-14. 9. Instituto de Fomento y Asesorla Municipal (IFAM) and Acci6n Internacional Tecnica (AITEC), Divisi6n de nacional. Acci6n Inter­ Estudio de Servicios Basicos en 30 Cantones. Parte 1: Resumen General. San Jos&, Sept. 1974. Sample survey based on interviews in 453 comunidades in 30 canto--s using (65). Data are not on computer tape. 10. Luis Fernando Escalante Soto. Anlisis Econ6mico del de Producci6n Costo de Frijol (Phaseolus Vu.garis L.). Unpublished thesis for Faculty of Agronomy, University of Costa Rica, 1974. Sample survey of 257 operational holdings growing frijol selected from 6 of Costa Rica (not including ). 11. Instituto de Nutrici6n de Centro America y Panama Oficina (INCAP). de Investigaciones Internacionales de Nacionales los Institutos de Salud (EEUU). Ministerio de Salubridad Evaluaci6n Pdblica. Nutricional de la Poblaci6n de Centro Am6rica'y Panama: Costa Rica. INCAP V-28. N.p., 1969. A sample survey based on a 0.27 per cent sample total population of the of Costa Rica, divided into San Jose and non-San Jos6. Techniques used included clinical nutritional examination of 4,o65 persons, anthropometric measurements and description of the environment. Time frame: April - June 1966. See also (243). 12. Rafael Angel Rodriguez Picado. Bases para la Planificaci6n del Desarrollo Pecuario dl Pacifico Sur. Unpublished thesis for Faculty of Agronomy, University of Costa Rica, 1973. Survey of 917 fincas representing 7.14 per cent region of Pacifico in the Sur, Costa Rica. Method: interviews of farmers using questionnaire. QI. 13. Fernando Antonio Rivera Rodriguez. Estudi0 de la Problematica Agrfcola del Pac{fico Surd Costa Rica Y Bases -parala Plani­ ficarion de Su Desarrollo. Unpublished thesis for Faculty of Agronomy, University of Costa Rica, 1973. Survey of 97 fincas representing 7.1h pr cent in the -i region of Pacifico Sur. Method: same as. (12) altlhml,?,h -174r 35.

14. Costa Rica. Ministerio de Trabaj0 y Bienestar Social. Estudio Socio-Econ6mico de la Reffion Noreste de Guanacante. San Jos, July 1967. Sample survey of both urban and rural population. The results would seem to have been rendered obsolete by thc 1973 census.

15. "Balance de Recursos Alimenticios de la Poblaci6n de Costa Rica, Disponibilidad y Necesidades, Segln Calor.as, Proteinas, Vitamin A, y Hierro de los Productos por Regiones Programaticas de Salud, Provincias, Cantones y Distritos." Food balance sheets for Costa Rica; disaggregated down to district level, consisting of computer printout sheets.

16. Costa Rica. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia. Anklisis Econ6mico de la Producei6n Lechera en la Zona de , , 1970-1971. (Mimeographed bulletin) Study of 14 dairies in the Santa Elna region. Time frame: July 1970 - June 1971. Method: interviews with operators.

17. Centro de Estudios Laborales Centroamericano. An6lisis Comparativo sobre Sistemas de Salarios y Beneficios Sociales del Sector Azucarero en Centroam~rica. Estudio No. 6. N.p.' (San Jose?), 1975. Tabulated data on wages of sugar cane field workers in each country of Central America and Panama. See also (71).

18. V. M. Esquival Benavides. An61isis Econ6mico del Costo de Producci6n de Maiz (Zea Mays L.). Unpublished thesis, University of Costa Rica, 1974.

19. J. Osborne, G. Alfaro, J. Craig Tinney, F. A. Villalobos. Estudio de Costos de Producci6n de Arroz, Pacifico Seco, Zona de , 29 Fincas. San Jos&: Ministerio de Agri­ cultura, Departamento de Economia y Estadisticas Agropecuarias, Nov. 1974. (Mimeographed bulletin) Time frame: July - Oct. 1973.

20. Banco Cr6dito Agricola de , Secci6n do Tasaciones Manual de Costos Basicos do Actividades Agrovecuarios 1973. Cartago, 1973. Contains cost of production data for a long list of crops.

21. S. Kenneth Shwedel, agricultural economist, unpublished list of farm-level potato prices in the main Cartago market, by weeks, Aug. 197~4 - Oct. 1975.

22. Gregorio Alfaro.Arg u edas and Edwin Marin Torres. Costos do Producci6. de CaQ en Costa Rica. San JosO: Oficina del : CafQ, 1968. 36.

23. Hernai Andueza Acuna. Estudio Aro-Ecor Wco del Cultivo del Tabaco en Costa Riea. Unpublished thesis for the Faculty of Agronomy, University of Costa Rica, 1957. 24. Mario C6rdoba L. Estudio Agro-Econ6mico de 22 Finca. de Zaragoza do . Unpublished thesis for the Faculty of Agronomy, University of Costa Rica, 1958.

25. Instituto de Fomentbu y Asesorla Municipal (IFAM). Estudio sobre el Mercadeo de Alimentos y la Remodelaci6n del Mereado Municival en el Canton de . San Jos: IFAM, Programa Integral de Mercadco Agropecuario, Serie Investigaciones 216. 1974. A study of distribution and marketing of food in a market town 45 kms. southwest of San Jose based on interviews with 145 households (including rural) and 87 merchants. The report only summarizes the data on income and consumption, Which are on questionnaires as of the present.

26._ - Estudio sobre el Mercadeo de Alimentos, la Remodela­ ci6n del Mercado Municipal y la Terminal do Autobuses en el Canton de . Similar study as (25), this one for a market town north-. west of San Jos. 27. Costa Rica. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia. Departa­ mento de Economia y Estadistica Agropecuaria. Boletin EstadIstico Agropecuario. Quarterly bulletin. Contains input prices by "agricultural regions." Reliability of data reporied to be doubtful. 28. Gregorio Alfaro, Kenneth Krause, Craig Tinney, and Arturo Villalobos F. Estudio de Costos de Producci6n de Yuca en la Zona Norte, Zona de San Francisco de la Palmera. San Jos6: Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderla, Departamento de Economia y Estadisticas Agropecuarias, June 1974. (Mimeo­ graphed bulletin) Study based on interviews with 29 growers, average size of holding 22.8 manzanas. Time frame: 1973.

29. George H. Hargreaves, Utah State University. Computer printouts by country showing Moisture Availability Index (MAT) for meteorological stations with time series of recorded data. Professor Hargreaves' work has been done under Contract No. AID/ta-c-1103. By March 1976, MAI will be available for all the Central American countries based on data from reporting stations ranging f'rom 5 to 30 .years' running. 37.

30. Gregorio Alf'aro, Roberto Pacholke, Rodrigo Gonz,6.iez and Fred Purdy. Estudio de Co:"tos de Producci6n de Arroz en cl Paej-fico Sur, Zona do i'arrita, Mayo-Octubre 1971. San Jos6: Ministeric de Agricultura y Ganaderia, DeparLamento do Economla y Estadisticas Agropecuarias, Nov. 1972. (Mimeographed bulletin) Study based or interviews with 26 rice farmers, average size of holding 1IA1 manzanas.

31. Costa Rica. Ministerio de Economla, Industria y Conercio. Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Est'adlistica Vital -1972. San Jose..

32. Costa Rica. Ministerio do Agricultura y Ganaderia. Departa­ mento de Economla y Estadisticas Agropecuarias. Anilisis Agroecon6mico del Malz en la Region de Cartagena, Canton de Santa Cruz, Guanacaste. San Jos6, Sept. 1971. (Mimeograpied) Study of 11 farms, average size 22.5 manzanas. Gives yield range. 33. Estudio Agroecon6-nico del. Cultivo de la Papa en la Region de . San Zos6, June 1972. (Mimeographed) Study of 29 farms, average size 17.3 manzanas. Time frame: May -Oct. 1971. Gives yield range.

314. Estudio Agroeeon6mico de Cult ivo de la Papa en la *Region de Cartago. San Jos&, June 1972. (Mimeographed) Study of 28 farms, average size 26.6 manzanas. Time frame: Oct. - Nov. 1971. 35. Gregorio Alfaro, Roberto Pacholke, Rodrigo Gonz6.lez and Fred Purdy. Estudio de Costos de Producci6n de Okra en el Paclfico Sur, Re ion de Puerto Cort's. San Jose: Ministerio de Agri­ cultura y Canaderia. Departamento de Economla y Estad.sticas Agropeciarias, Sept. 1972. (Mimeographeo) Stud, of 12 farms, average size 27.0 manzanas. Time frame: *Nov. 1971 - May 1972.

36. Costa Rica. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia. Departa­ mento de Economla y Estadisticas Agropecuarias. Estudio de Costos de Prcducci6n del Cultivo de Chayote en iCanton *:de ParaLso, Cartaro. San Jose, June 1972. (1Mimeographed) Study of 10 farms, average size not given. Time frame: Feb. - May 1972. Gives yield range.

37. Gregoric Alfaro, Oscar Calle, J Craig Tinney and Arturo Villalobos F. Estudic do Costos de Producci6n do Arro-,. on la Region (,el Pacfieo Seco, Zona, de , y Santa Cruz, 36 Fincas. San. Jos6: Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia. Departamento de EconomIa y Estadisticas Agro­ pecuariaS, Nov. 1973. (Mimeographed) - Study of' 36 farms, average size 28.3 man/inas. Time I: frame: April - Dec. 1972. Gives yield range. 38.

38. Grogorio Alfaro, Lusk F. Robinson, Arturo Vill.alobos and J. Craig Jinney. Estuoia de Costo do Producci6n do Papa en la Herion de :, -ar)iquJ Z a de Zarcero, 30 ]incas. San Jos6: Ministerio de AgricHu.t~ura y Ganaderia. DepartLmeIto de Econom'a y Estadfttticas Agropecuarias, Nov. 1973. (Mimeographed) Study of 30 farms, average size 23,6 manzanas. Time frame: Oct. 1972 - March 1973.

39. Gregorio Alfaro, Ar+.uro Villalobos, .Robcrt Pacholke, J. Craig Tinney and Peggy S. Barlett. Estudio de Costos de Producci6n do Frijol en la Refgion Mes;eta Central Oriental (Cartag:) Zona de Puriscal, 51 Fincaus. San Jos6: Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderla. Departamento de Economia y Estadfsticas Agropecuarias, Aug. 1973. (Mimeographed) Study of 51 farms, average size 12.)4 manzanas. Time frame: April - Nov. 1972.

0. Gregorio Alfaro, Robert Pacholke, J. Craig Tinney, Peggy S. Barlett and Arturo Villalobos. Estudia Econ6mico de Costos de Producci6n de'Malz en la Reron Meseta Central Oriental, Zona de Puriscal, 63 Fincas. San Jos6: Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderla. Departamento de Economia y EstadLticas Agropecuarias, Sept. 1973. (Mimeographed) Study of 63 farms, average size 11.5 manzanas. Time frame: April -Nov. 1972. Gives yield range.

)41. Gregorio Alfaro, Robert Pacholke, Richard Burke, J. Craig Tinney and Arturo Vill.alobos. Estudlo de Costos de Produc­ ci6n de Malz en la Region Meseta Central Occidental, Zona de de Ojo de Agua, 30 Fincas. SanJose: Minis­ terio de Agricultura y Ganaderla. Departamento de Economia y Estadisticas Agropecuarias, July 1973. (Mimeographed) Stu(,y of 30 farms, average size 6.2 manzanas. Time frame: May - Dec. 1972. Gives yield range.

12. Gregorio Alfaro, Robert Pacholke, Richard Burke and ,Arturo Villalobos. Estudio de Costos do Producci6n do Frijol en la Region Meseta Central. Occidental., Zona de San Rafael de Ojo de Agua, 30 Fincas. San Jos6: Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia. Departamento de Econorma y Estadfsticas Agro­ pecuarias, July 1973. (Mimeographed) Study of 30 farms, average size 6.2 manzanas. Time frame: Sept. - Dec. 1972. h 3. _ Estudio de Costos de Produeci6n do Arroz , Zona- de , Labrador, Santa Hita y Jaco, 25 Fincas. San Jos6: 4inisteriode Agricultura y Ganad6cir. . Departamento do Economla y Estadisti:as Agropecuriais, June 1973. (Mimeo.) Study of 25 farms, avera.c si ': 9Ih.8 manzanas. Time frame: June - Dec. 1972. C:Give.Sy range. 39.

h'4.h Grcgorio Alfaro, Robert Pacholke, Arturo Villalobos and Jesus A. Hernandez R. Estudia do Costos dc Producclin de Arroz en el Pacfivo Seco, Zona de Liberia, Guanacastet 32 Fincas. San Jos&: Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia. Departamento ade Economia y Estadisticas Agropecuarias, May 1973. (Mimeographed) Study of 32 farms, average size 91.6 manzanas. Time frame: May - Dec. 1972. Gives yield range.

145. Banco Central de Costa Rica. Departamento de Cr6dito de Desarrollo. Grupo Interbancario para Estudio do Avlos. Estimated detailed costs of production for cabbage, papa, sorghum, tobacco, yuca, pl'tano, cotton, frijol, rice, corn, sugar cane. (Mimeographed)

6. Ian Rawson. "Nutrition Research Project in San Ram6n, Costa Rica." Unpublished summary interim report, Costa Rica, May 1974.

*47. 1963 Population and Housing Census, Costa Rica.

48. Tenencia de la Tierra y Desarrollo Rural en Centroam6rica.. San Jos-: Editorial Universitaria Centroamericana, Educa, 1973. A volume of analysis with some tabulated data. * '49. 1955 Census, Costa Rica.

<7 'i i50. 1963 Agricultural Cennus, Costa Rica.

51. Costa Rica. Instituto de Tierras y Colonizaci6n. Ectudio Regional de la Zona Norte de Costa Rica. San Jos6, 1966.

52...... Estudio Regional de la Zona Atl~ntico Norte de Costa Rica. San Jos6, 1966.

53. _ . ;Estudio Regional de Paraiso, Ujarras, Urasca. San Jose, Dec. 1970.

54, _ . Estudio do Tenencia de la Tierra en la Provincia de Lim6n. San JoA, Jan. 1972. I Us0o ...... < '" 55ii.....:Tamahio .. deE stim la.Parcela aei ne. s. -so. Familiarb .. e Tenencia en eI Valle de-,laCentral, Tierra San y:-"

Jo s6, March 1970.

56. . Etudiode le Region do . San Jo6, May 196h.

57 . Estudio de so y Tenencia de la Tirra en ei Canto n Jimenez. San Jose, Aug. 1973. 40.

58. .. Estudio de lac Reservas Indbgenas Boruca Terraba y China Kicha. ban Jose, 1963.

59. __. Estudio de J.as Reservas Indloenas de Salitre. San Jo6, June 1966.

60. leraclio A. Lombardo. Analisis de una Economia Apr cola dentro do la Meseta CcUntral de Costa Rica. San Jos: Instituto Interamericano de Ciencias Agricolas (IICA), 1965. A survey of a rural community near Cartago, mixed small farmers.

61. S. Matmana-Medina. Encuestas Socioecon6 micas en Zonas Agricolas Seleccionadas de los Palses Centroamericanos: Resultados y Anlisis. Mexico, D.F. : Instituto Universi­ tario Centroamericano de Investigaciones Sociales y Eco­ n6micas, 1964(?).

62. Victor Hugo Cespedes S. Costa Rica: La Distribuci6n del Ingreso y el Consumo de Algunos Alimentos. San Jos: Publicaciones do la Universidad de Costa Rica, Serie Economia y Estadistica No. 45, 1973. A national sample survey based on interviews with 3,100 families. QI. Financed by AID.

63. Costa Rica. Oficina de Catastro. Ministerio de Obras POblicas y Transportes.

6b. Costa Rica. Ministerio de Hacienda. Registro Pblico de la Propiedad.

65. Convenio IFAM-AITEC. Instituto de Fomento y Asesoria Municipal. Estudio del Regimen Municipal, Servicios Basicos. Boleta, The use of this questionnaire was explained by Jeffrey A. Ashe, AITEC Costa Rica, San Jos. This questionnaire has been applied in 860 comunidades in 57 rural cantonesI of Costa Rica,.using a technique of collective interviews. The principal focus is on the infrastrUctural aspects of the rural people's well-being, but the questionr.aire is very comprehensive and detailed, generating such primary data as wage rates and remuneration in kind prevalent in the community, product price variability, villagers' attitudes to problems, and some aspects of agra ian relations. As a methodol6gical document explains, the purposes of '' the survey include:* / ­ "TPo interview in a group persons who, are locally con- sidered to be knowledgeable about the community, instead dY interviewing'individnals selected 'by a sampling procedure. The time necessary for intervicw was thus redu cod to three or four hours per community. An effort was made to include individuals from different social and economic levels in the, group. 41. "To solicit opinions from the interviewees (with respect to the problems faced by the community, obtain rig credit, stat e of hthA,nting) and t ku of theIe in the analysis. These would suppl ement illformali ion obia ined by more objective means as to the infrastructure in the community. It is assumed that the members of the community are capable of interpreting important aspects of their surroundings. "To collect data on all aspects of the community's situation, sacrificing detail in order to arrive at a broader picture. With a good view of the general situation the specific needs and projects can be efficiently chosen. Later, on the basis of these data, detailed studies for each specific project can be carried out. "To tabulate the data by hand, using simple means and avoiding heavy computer costs. It has thus been possible to edit a first report of analysis only three months following the completion of field work."

66. Costa Rica. Ministerio de Salud Publica. Unpublished national sample survey of nutrition, 1975. This survey gathered data on: (1) anthropometric measures, (2) dietary habits, and (3) presence of a refrigerator inthe house.

67. Costa Rica. Ministerio de Salud Puiblica. Departamento de Estad'stica. Mortalidad Infantil sea6n Distritos y Cantones. San Jos6, Jan. 1975. Contains tabulated data for the years 1970 and 1973.

68. . Mortalidad Bruta y Natalidad seg(n Dis trito. San Jos6, March 1975. Contains tabulated data for the years 1970 and 1973.

69. Costa Rica. Ministerio de Salud Publica. Questionnaire. A monthly record kept by each of the approximately 80 health posts attached to the ministry throughout the country.

70. Costa Rica. Ministerio de Trabajo. Labor force survey, forthcoming 1976.

71. Centro de Estud':,s Laborales Centroamericano. An6'lisis Comparativo sobre Sist e mas de Trabajo y Precio en la Rama de los Bananeros. San Jos6, 1975. Same type of investigation as (17). Cover.,- all the Central American countries. As explained, by an official of' the Centro, the data contained in this publication were derived from review of contracts and 'reports of' labor union leaders who attended 'a seminar on1 theC subject of collective bargaining between labor unions 'and.banana compan'ies. A'draft of: the tabulated data was, circulated to correspondents in all the countris covered', who made the necessary corrections and chanres. 'Tt was published after further 'editing in 'the, Centro. 42. 72. Nick Amarteifio. "Agricultural Credit; The Role of Financieras and Prestamistas." Unpublished Associatd paper, Colleges of the Midwest (ACM), San Jos6, 1969. Study based on interviews with borrowers and lenders. This paper and those that follow through (83) were made available for consultation through the kindness of Dr. Ridgway Satterthwaite, Program Director, ACM, San Jos . 73. Peggy Barlett. "The Use of Time in a Costa Rican Village." Unpublished paper, ACM, San Jos&, 1969. Study by an anthropology student of a village of 450 inhabitants in , Guanaiaste. Time frame: Sept. - Nov. 1968. Includes census of families, land use map of village, discussion of the village economyincluding inter­ family exchanges, and a one-week-long time-motion study of the eight household members with whom she lived. 74. Jonathan Buswell and Robert F. Voertman. "Costos d! Mano de Obra y Rumbo de Estos Costos para Diferentes Tcnicas del Cultivo de Malz en Costa Rica - Muestreo ACM/CAFP 1967." Unpublished paper, ACM, San Jos6, 1967. Reliability of original data not clear. 75. T. Edmund Downing and E. Jean Matterson. "Squatters: Form of Spontaneous A Colonization in Costa Rica." Unpublished paper, ACM, San Jose, 1965. A study of squatters on two private farms in San Carlos and Nicoya. Time frame: Nov. 1964 - July 1965. Contains discussion of the legal procedure for titling land. Con- tains tables, map of Costa Rica showing density of squatter population. Contains text of a typical rental contract signed by squatters. QI. 76. Decky Fiedler. "The Patron - Peon System in Guanacaste - The Dissolving Bargain." Unpublished paper, ACM, San Jos&, A study of labor 1969. relations in a village in Nicoya, Guana­ caste. Contains diet information for two families for one week. Also contains information on non-productive expenditure for two families. 77. Peter L. Goedecke. "Suppliers of inputs as Sources of AgriculturalSan Jo se 1969 Credit in Costa Rica." Unpubl'ished ...... paper, ACM, .. . . A study based on interviews. 78. Dinny Gottlieb. "Nutrition and Food Preparation in Santiago de Puriscal and ." Unpublished paper,' ACM, San Jos6, 197h1. A study based on intensive interview: with 25 rural families in each locality. Time frame: Feb. - April 1974. QI. Uses INCAP conversion factors.. d13..

79. Nancy F. Jones. "The Use of Coo" In Fuel in CosLa Rica.'' Unpublished paper, ACM, Ba Y 1

80. Ellen 0'Malley. "A Comparison of the ULilization at' Locally Available Food Plants and Medicinal Plants in the Towns of Santiago de Puriscal and Grecia." Unpublirhled paper, ACM, San Jos6, 197h. Time frame: Feb. - April 1970.

81. Guita Modak. "The Rural Labor Situation in Part of Perez Zeledon." Unpublished paper, ACM., San Jos6, 1973. Interview study. QI.

82. Carol Sue Nordengren. "The Family of Marino Chaves Fernandez in San Rafael de Puriscal." Unpublished paper, ACM, San Jos6, 1968.

83. Susan Sanborn. "The Nutritional Status of Children in Santiago de Puriscal and Grecia." Unpublished paper, ACM, San Jos6, 197 4 . This appears to be the other half of the survoy described in (78).

84. CATIE/ROCAP Project Questionnaire. "Encuesta Preliminar a Pequeios Agricultores en la Region de , Costa Rica." Information was supplied by Dr. Damon Boynton, Project Principal Adviser, Turrialba, Costa Rica. The project falls into the category of those aimed at increasing productivity of small farmers by research into means for change in the cropping systems they follow. Baseline data are obtained by interviews with samples of small farmers using this questionnaire. Considerable care goes into the selection of the samples, for the aim is to cover as broad a range of agroclimatic and agro-socioeconomic conditions as possible. Desired sample size is 80 farmers. This questionnaire has already been used in pilot surveys. A follow-up series of surveys are planned to extend over a three-year period. Data processing will be carried out at the computer center of the Centro Agron6mico Tropical ue Invet igaciones y Enseianzas (CATIE) at Turrialba for this survey and for others planned under the project in other countries of Central America. The data are the p-porty of the host governments,' the project personnel worki'ng by prior agree­ ment with personnel from various agencies of these governments or institutions 'in.these countri.es. Sec also (118).

85. Birth Certificates,. Costa Rica, 1968 - 1971.

86. Death Certificates, Costa Rica, 1968 - 19'1.

87. Banco Central 'de Nicaragua. Pinisterio de Fconornih, Industria y Comercio. Censos faeion les Jl.7. Poblach. Vol. T. Caracterlsticas Generales. Vol. IT.' CaracterlsLicas Educa­ cional'es. Vol. TII. Caructerirsticar; Econ6mican. Managua, Oct. S44.

197A . Pobfaci0n er MnicJino. Vol. I. Caraeters 'tiea, Genera]ps. Managua, March 975 NationaJ census results. Time frame: April 20, 1971. Questionnaire printed separately.

88. . Vivienda. Managua, Oct. 1974. National census results. Time frame: April 20, 1971. Questionnaire printed separately.

89. Nicaragua. Ministerio de Agricultura y GanaderTa. Divisi6n de Planficaci6n Sectorial. Agropecuaria. Censo Nacional Agropecuario. Cuestionario rara la Encuesta de Inuresos y Empleo Rurales. Managua, 1976. Time frame: May 1975 - April 1976, except for stock questions which refer to week of interview. Being applied on a rotating regional basis.

90. Robert M. Finley. Analysis of Ajonjol! Production in Nicaragua: A Detailed Study of Cost and Returns. Columbia, Missouri: University of Missouri, Jan. 1974. Sample: 55 farms producing sesame.

91. . Analysis of the Production of Frijoles in Nicaragua: A Detailed Study of Cost and Returns. Columbia, Missouri: University of Missouri, Jan. 1974. Sample: 220 farms.

92. . Analysis of Livestock Farms in Ilicaraqua: A Detailed Study of Co'ts and Returns. Columbia, Missouri: University of Missouri, March 1974. Sample: 160 farms.

93. _ . Analysis of Maize Production in Nicaragua: A Detailed Study of Costs and Returns. Columbia, Missouri: University of Missouri, Dec. 1973. Sample: 293 farms.

94. . Anal:nis of Arroz Production in Nicaragua: A Detailed Study of Costs and Returns. Columbia, Missouri: University of Missouri, Feb. 1974. Sample: 60 farms.

95. . Analys., of Sorgo Production in Nicaraua: A Detailed Study of Costs and Returns. Columbia, Missouri: University of' Missouri, Feb. 19704. Sample: 910 arms.

96. Philip F. Warnken. Production Costs and Returns for Major Agricultural Pr. IUcts of' Nicaragua: Data Tables for 19Y2 and 1975. Colu, ia, Missouri: University of Missouri, .Feib. 1975. %

97. Nicaragua. Instituto Nacional de. Comerceo Exterior e Interior *(INCEI). Bolein Tnformativo. A monthly bulletin, containing monthly prices to farmers, 45.

averaged, each for corn, boans, rice, and industriu sorghum.

98. Insti tuto du Iutrici6n do PCntro Am&riova y Pana& (INCAP). Oficina de Invetigacionns ]nternacionai 's dP ons 1n.sti tutos c . Nacionales de Salud (EEUU). Minis;i 5 ro du SAnIubrid dil. uhi Evaluaci6n Nutricional do .a Poblaui3n de CeLro Am6rica y Panami' Nicaragua-. -2.-. -NCAP1.p., 1969.. Sample size: 3,477 individuals, or 0.21 per cent Cf the 1966. total population of Nicaragua. Time frame: Jan. - March See also (243).

99. Nicaragua. ComitO Nacional Agropecuarlo. Unidad do An2iisis Sectorial. Encuesta Social a Niv-l do Jofde__ieamn a. A sample survey of 1,500 rural household heads. AIe frame: 1973.

100. Nicaragua. Ministerio do Ecoonoma . Oficina do Catatro. Cadastral records in Nicaragua exist only for tho- Pacific side of the country.

101. Nicaragua. Comit6 Nacional Agropecuario. Unidad do AnAlisis Sectorial. Encuesta Socio Econ6micn dp la Empresa ArronecuariN, Aspectos Agricolas. Time frame: 1 May 1971 - 30 April 1972.

102. Nicaragua. Ministerio de Econom{a. Direccion de Etad!,Mica Censos. Crecimiento do In Poblaci~n Nicaragun-e. Managua: Boletin de Informaci6n, Jan. - Feb. 1953, Vol. I.

103. Nicaragua. Unidad de Anklisis del Sector Salud. Questionnaire. Time frame: Oct. 1975.

104. Nicaragua. Oficina Ejecutiva de los Censos. Manual del I Enumerador. Censos Nacionales 1971. Vivienda, FPohl.ac i6n_ Agropecuario. Managua, 1971. Contains questions asked.

23 Feb. 1976. 105. ___.Landholding survoy, begun Sampling technique: area frame sample. Sample size: 20 per cent of segments in country.

i06. Nicaragua. Ministerio- de Economia. Direccion General d Estadistica y Censos. Censos Nacionales 1963. Agropecuarl?. Caracterigticas Generales do las Explotac:ions Aroecuarias_ por Departamentoz y Municinios. anajua, Mrch1 966. The results of the first census of agriculture. Time frarme: 25 April 1963 - 31 May 1963. Data cover the agricultural year 19G2 1963. Maps for corn, cotton, coffee, cattle. QT.. . ; 46. 107. Nicaragua. Minis-Lerio do Economia. Dirccl& General de E tuadistica. Oficina Central du lou Censos. Eneueota, A.ropey ...... t ,oria pa_-iL, Censo General Agro­ jLr'uario Aio Alrcol]a Mayo 19051 - Abril 19Q. Forma EAP-3. Qu (28 t ionnaire. Sample survey of 51,581 fincas of more than one manzana. No queotions on form of land tenure or agricultural labor. Time frame: April 1952. 108. Nicaragua. Direcci6n General rIasaci6r do Ingresos. eregistro de Rural. Forma DV-h. Modificada el 8 de noviembre 1971.

1.09. Nicaragua. Ministerio de Economia. Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Censo General de la Poblaci6n de la Rep6blica de Nicaragua. Mayo de 1950. Volumen XVII. In forme General Y Cifras de la Reniblica de Nicaragua. Managua, Aug. 195 4 . Census results. 110. Nicaragua. UNASEC. Two surveys on comrnunity and infrastructure. social One was for cabeceras municipales and the other for localidades. Ill. Nicaragua. Mininterio de Agricultura y Ganaderla. Centro de Gesti6n Agricola. El Club de Aricultores de Pacayita. El Ciclo Agricola de 1974. Managua, Feb. 1975. This study ana the ones through (114) were done French coop6rants by of the Grupo de Gesti6n Rural (Farm Management Group) and their Nicaraguan counterparts in the ministry as part of a program of training. Paper written by Ing. Hubert Rischmann. Place: a community in the department of Masaya.

112. . Informe sobre el Grupo Arlcola do Boaauito: "La Uni6n". Managua, Aug. 1975. Study written by Ing. Sergio Carot and Agr. Javier Matus Lazo.

113. - . Informe sobre la Cooperativa Maria Auxiliadera Apompoa. Managua, March 1975. Study report written by Ing. Grard Barbeau and T. Ad. Francisco Guzman Iglesias.

114. .Las Cuentas de 70.. la Cooerativa "La Uni6n" Cilos 1/72. 72/73. 73/74• Managua, Oct,. 1974., Study report written by Ing. Hubert Rischmann.

115. Nicaragua. Ministerjos do Agricultura, Educaci6n. PNblica. PRODESAR. y Salud Segunda Etapa 1976 - 1978. Plan Anual de Trabajo. Documento No. 4. Managua, Jan. 1976. 47. Contains results of a benchmark s mplo survy, "Estudio soCio-Econ6mico do Lns Comunsidads dol PoDESAN." of' Sample size: 9,009 rural household: in tLhe deparitt nt; Masaya, Granada, Caraoo and I.Insatcpe. Avcrage hou3rhold size: 5.99. Literacy level of sample: 57 pcr cent. Questionnaire contains que ons an radio listening and type of program listened to, which could be a mes.urie of non-formal education.

116. Nicaragua. Unidad de Analisis do Sector fblud. Estudi,a de Morbilidad y MIortalidad. Managua, 1975. These are unpublished tabulations in the hand:s of the U.A.S.S.

117. "Consumo Promedio de Alimentos entre Familias y Preescolarn s del Area Rural de Nicaragua - Resultados Obtenudos por el M6todo de Registro diarin de 3 dar." Unsourced table (un­ published INCAP data? GAFICA/FAO data?) found in a type­ written report "Informe del Diagn6stico del Componente de Nutrici6n en el Sector Salud de Nicaragua; Documento Pre­ liminar Sujeto a Revisi6n del Comit& T6cnico Especi.fico de INCAP." (1975?)

118. CATIE/ROCAP Project Questionnaire. "Encuesta a Pequeios Agricultores de la Region de .. , Nicaragua. " Feb. - March 1976. Questionnaire used in a sample survey of 40 small farms in San Ram6n and 40 others in -.a Trinidad, both in the department of Matagalpa. (Information supplied by Dr. Oscar Hidalgo, Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderl., Managua.) Field work completed in February 1976. Data are to be sent to CATIE, Turrialba, Costa Rica, for processing. Plans are to carry out a similar survey in an area of Zelaya in 1977. See also (80).

119. Fundaci6n Nicaragaensc do Desarrollo (FUNDE). Office files.

120. Catherine Grace Strach'n. A Nutritional Assessment of Pro­ school Children in Rural Hicarafua. Yale University Master's Report, 1971. An intensive study of the village of Tonala, 20 miles from Chinandega. Contains good description of houses and environment of the village.

121. Robert S. Bell, Randall S. Kuhlmann and Ivan R. "chailer. Health Care in the Orinoco Region Nicaragua, 2 Feb. 1976. (Mimeographed) A study of the village of Orinoco in Zeolaya. Q,. Good discussion of the difficulty of obtaining meaningful answr s to standard questionnaire queries on births, deaths, etc. 48. 122. David A. Tomb. Demof raji c arid ealth Survey ocS ote d M ~1ki:1o-1ridi Vi l( , !, 'trn Nic rua. N . (Mieo, ,tudy o" 139 houeho~l ds ill h villages using questi onnaire

123. Nicaragua. Miniseric do Economa, Industria y Comoercio. Banco Contra]. do Nicaragua. Oficina Ejecutiva de lTos Censos. Con.os__ aciona]e:. 20 Abril 171 . Agropecuario. Ci fras Pro]1inarie ar , oc ento Iariua]. ol et n 1o . 2. Managua, March 1972. This is the only published volume of results of the 1971 census of agriculture, the second such census. As the introduction points out, a post-enumeration sample survey revealed non-sampling errors of 33 per cent, 3h per cent, and 112 per cent, respectively, in the data series on number of farms, area, and livestock inventory. The present volume contains, therefore, "adjusted" figures. There is general agreement that the results of the first census of agriculture (taken in 1963) (see (106)) were considerably more reliable than those of 1970. Officials at thecensus office attribute the existence of errors of significant magnitude in the 1971 census to a desire to proceed too rapidly, use of too many enumeators, and insufficient attention to the training­ of enuierators. The raw data, unedited, are on tapes at the census office. The reporting unit was changed from "unidad de explotaci6n" within the same comarca in 1963 to "unidad de explotaci6n" within the same municipio in 1971,

12. ___ Encuesta Agricola Granos Basicos (Primera Siembra 1 197 - 75). Producci6n y Costo de Produeci6n. Sample survey. Sample size: 2,500 farms. Data collected on corn, sorghum, beans, dry and wet rice Time frame: early crop 1974 - 1975.

125. El Salvador. Ministerio de Econom a. Direcci6n General de Estad-stica y Censos. Tercer Censo Nacional Aropecuario 1971. Vo].urnen I. Caracter]sticas a Nivel Nacional, Departamental y Municipal. San Salvador, Oct. 1974. Results of third census of agriculture, aggregated. Unit of reference: operational holding regardless of number of fragments and tenure. Contains some aggregated comparisons wi;h second censils of agriculture (127). Time frame: agri­ cultural year I Ma1y 1970 - 30 April 1971 except for inventory questions which refer to 22 Aug. 1971. Method: interview of the operator or of someone who is identified as working on the operational holding. QI. Income, data restricted to a genera, question dealing with sales of types of products, although' it is not clear from the explanatory notes iwhether .products" is meant. to include household labor used off the farm. Wi-Lth respect to Vl1I; the question ask.-ed yces/no if worked f'ragmnts- in other municipios, ,andif yez;, names of others and cross-reference numbers to question aires in thosae municipios, an improvement in methodology over (127). 49.

126. .Cuarto, Censo Nacionna de Pohb aciv i n 1971. V Iumrl I. Cararctur.stilean Gcnral en . Caiatcr.... 737 -, ucnjur. Foecundidad. San Sal.vador , DT. 397 i7 Results of the fourth po!ulat, ion censu: , aggregated. Time frfane: 28 June 197.1 - 12 July 1971 in rural areas. QT. Contains questions on birth place and residence two years previous.

127. _ . Segundo Censo Agroveeuari o 1961. San Salvador, Dec. 1967. Census results aggregated. Unit of reference: operational holding regardless of number of fragments and tenure, Time frame: 1 May 1960 - 30 April 1961 except for inventory questions which refer to 5 June 1961. Mechod: int;erview n, the operator or of someone who is identified as working on the operational holding. QI. Includes two questionnaires: one marked A-Fl for the operator or someone identified as working on the holding, and one marked A-F2 for "productores que hayan trabajado unao mKs parcelas en calidad de colonos." With respect to V14, the questionnaire asked yes/no if he worked fragments located in other municipios as well.

128. . Primer C' nso Agropecuario. Octubre, Noviembre, Diciembre de 1950. San Salvador, Oct. 1954. Census results, aggregated.. Unit of reference: operational holding regardless of number of fragments or land tenure. Time frame: agricultural year I May 1949 - 30 April 1950. QI.

129. ___. Tercer Censo Uacional de Vivienda 1971. San Salvador, Dec. 1974. Census results, aggregated, Unit of reference: house­ hold. Time frame: 28 June 1971 - 12 July 1971. QI.

130 El Salvador. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia. and Direcci6n General de Economia Agropecuaria. Divisi6n de + 131. Estadisticas Agropecuarias. Encuesta para Determinacion de Insumos Agropecuarios. Questionnaires. Use of the questionnaires was explained by Lic. Manuel Vasquez Ramos, Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia, San Salvador. The country is divided into 500 segments, stratified by 10 types of predoinent land use, using for this purpose aerial photographs. From these, a rotating. sample of segments is selected at random for construction . i of' an open segment area frames ample. The investigation then proceeds in two phases with use of questionnaires: (1) an' investi~gation of structural data, using (130); -(2) an investigation. of input use per crop (called "Pstudio de casos") using (131). operational'In'the firstholding, phase, disregarding the unit ofnumber reference of fragments is the and

o land tenure. 'According.ly, in (130) there are no q uestions . .

on' land tenure; cropped and non-cropped areas arn di s- .. .F aggregated by. cropping season. Questions on us, of hired labor (permanent and casual) by season and by type are good. 1 50.

In the second phase, which involves selection of a sub-2ampJple, the unit of reference is the crop cultivated per cropping season by one cultivator. It is Considered undesirab.c to include the same operational holding in the oub-samples selected more than once because of the problemr of interviewee fatigue. In (131) the questions on labor utilization by cropping operation are particularly good. The questions about man-hours of labor per unit area per crop are separated into three levels of technology: tractor power, animal power, and man power. Time frame: agricultural year 1975 - 1976. A mimeographed Publication has been issued: Encuesta Piloto San Rafael Obrajueloi Ensayo del Sistema do Mueptreo de Probibilidad de Area. San Salvador, Feb. 1975. This explains the pilot survey. QI. Advocates of the method of area frame sampling (muestreo de probibilidad de area) maintain that it is suitable for the construction of valid samples for the collection of socioeconomic data even in the countries of Central America with their highly heterogeneous pattern of cultivation. No opinion is offered here on this matter. It is suggested, however, that close attention be paid to recent experience in the Dominican Republic, where the method has been tried. It is clear that area frame sampling, where the means (maps or aerial photographs) exist, provides a direct, relatively inexpensive, and easily controllable (at least with respect to area) method of sampling on a continuing basis, features that make it more attractive than the method of sample con­ struction from lists of households which tend to get out of date betwen censuses due to migration and other factors. If the area frame sampling method can yield valid samples for collection of socioeconomic data, it would seem highly desirable to make use of it on a more extensive basis. 132. Allen LeBaron and Associates. Investigation of the Social and Economic Asnects of the Proposed Tenure and Production Program. Peport No. I. Findings of the Field Survey and Productiv:t0 of Taret Families. (Preliminary, typewritten draft) Logan, Utah(?), June 1975. An informative study of agrarian relationJ in El based on intensive Salvador interviewing of a stratified sample of 58 households from rpr. entative regions of the country. Interview form contai"ied 77 questions. From census data, the authors calculate that the percentage of households of landless laborers (what they call "tenureless" ilaborers) is .37 Per cent in. Usulutan Department, 35 per cent in La Paz, and 31 per cent in La Libertad Department (vs. national average of 25 per.cent), giving some idea of the concentra­ tion of l.ndholding in these provinces. The. study documents the rise in land values and rents in the densely populated rural areas and the increase in the numberS of landless laborers over time. Poverty here is not manifested by low per. capita gross income. The small r.enter may be in a predicament worse than the landless laborer (see the distribution 51.

of gross income for a sample of households in La Libert2d Department given under reference (137), below. This study conta'i~ns some tabulatced data on farm budgets and household consumption, which are unfurtunately inadequately explained. Some graphed data on attitudes toward work, childre,,, cooperative membership, etc. are also poorly explained.

133. Albert G. Madsen and Mark H. Karns. Consumption Patterns of Selected Rural Families in El Salvador. San Salvador: .. . USAID Food and Agriculture Division, Jan. 1975. (Mimeo.) A study based on interviews with 500 vegetable producers.

134. Mark H. Karns, Albert G. Madsen and Ricardo Molina. An Intensive Study of Rural Consumption in El Salvador. San Bartolom6 Perulapla, Department of Cuscatlan, El Salvador November 1974. San Salvador, Dec. 1974. (Mimeographed)

135. El Salvador. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderla. i Direcci6n General de Obras de Riego y Drenajc:. Departa­ 6 mento de Estudios. Secci6n de Agroeconomia. Inve .tigaci n Socioecon6mica. Questionnaire. Survey based on interviews with houisehold heads. Samples chosen from families in 10 minor irrigation projects scattered throughout El Salvador. Field work completed and * idata in process of analysis. Time frame: Sept. - Oct. 1975.

de las Propiedades Inclumdas 136. _____. Estudio Agroecon6mico en el Area del Proyecto de la Zona Costera. Questionnaire. Survey based on interviews with cultivators, taking the operational holding as the reference unit. Questions framed in terms, of "present cropping season," "previous cropping season," etc. Very good on labor utilization re­ quirement per crop per operation. Time frame: Sept. - Oct. 1975. Data in process of analysis.

Distrito de Riego y 137. ___ Investigaci6n Socioecon6mica, Avenamiento No. 1 Zapotit6n. Febrero de 1971. San Salvador, n.d. Browning's book gives the history of the distribution !o of the hacienda of Zapotit .n, begun in 1943. It is not altogether clear from this study what relationship the area and its people bear to the original distribution, but the scope of the study covers an irrigated area of 4,580 ha.,,in.,La Libertad Department containing 598 households, of which 11.2 per cent are. owner-operators, Il1 per cent of.one type.renters or another., 31.9 per, cent landless laborrsO.~2 per cent non-agriculturalists, and 5.7 per ~cent~other Time frame: cealendar year 1970. Me"-hod: inter­ views~ with heads of households. QI. The stated aim was to obtain information on: demographic aspects of households., levels of healt~h, education and employmnent, charac~ter of housing and possessions, well-being of hoiisenolds in rela­ of living, media * ' Itionto income, expenditure, and cost It..,,n.1 xpo n.Iure, and ::oeia part i.e iat on 52.

T fti' 'C) , !l(Ly , -]and]i 21;l,::, c. r; &." ' . and rot ng aAnd : t. '':".:["' , tr.JI data inu ti; s urv'ey

t q r ow :r I . t. Pt' . . 1 - :'2' - Oif V.r.r '.o tl . c.tL . (, . ' P c,O tlib. 1)' 1 Lii t iu't t for W ;r , . -,7 , 1ri nel-r ii h I; , h. I ' . ,i< '.rL

Mil' il{fS_ 1" :[0 b II(O i '' yUA2EG i

Gross a G]Own,:: r - reGro2s Family Landless I n c on _ Oerator- InIcome Laborers

0-500 1 13 0-500 10 500-, o0 12 53 500-750 30 750-1,ooo 1, 000- 50 65 .11 51 1,000-1,250 15 1 ,250-1,50<} 15 1,500-2,000 8 hi 1, 500-1,750 14 2,000-2,500 1 ,750-2,000 17 8 25 2,000-2 , , 5 2,500-3,000 2,,50-2, 500 5 2 13 2,500-2,750 3 2,750- 3,000-3,500 ,000 3 5 10 3,000-3,250 5 3,250-3,500 3,500-4,000 0 3 9 3,500- , 750 3 above 3,750 0 above ,000 10 23

Source: com i.ed from Tables 37 and 38.

Note: 2. 5 C1on. ._- = U The diLstIribut ion of per capita income showed a similar pa t tern. 138. Je.6.. I 1 i ...v H:.in•.,Fid Co_)rn Technology: The C ' r, "L r TJ r: i a .). di ssertat ion, Univer,;it.y 'ol U 3 The writ ri. th a b, PviOWS irom -a country-ct Wide ::C1 o' ; r t .m ni,. ;). .00 ha. Time frame: -1073(?) . In 1nudoi o n listen:.ng to agr1r ultural ,:.t.:. on ,r:1,:; n redio. Alsosi (Iucst ons s K [.f1I t, I- il.d, or"average, and t . ,:l. ccl-1 yi.]i.d: ep 't ci -, each , and to fore­ cas L I'rquen " li(tribu '..1ion [n cOm ll2. ten year";. y Mark Karns. deCnsumo de 5Patrones ....::las 139. AlbertFamilias G. Madsen Ruirales Seieccionadas en ll K,:IvL dor,. . San : Salvador, Jan. 1975. (Mimeographed) :

Spanish translation of (133). Data tabulated by size of household. Uses INCAP conversion factors for foods for estimating protein and calorie equivalents.

1U0. . Un Estudio Intensivo de Consumo Rural en El Sal­ vador: San Bartolom6 Perulapia, Departamento de Cuscatlin, Noviembre 1974. San Salvador, Jan. 1975. (Mimeographed) Spanish translation of (134). A study of 16 families based on data recorded in families during 30 days. Question­ naire used but not included.

141. Jose Abilio Orellana Zelaya. Determinaci6n de Niveles de Vida en Familias Cubiertas por Extensi6n Agricola en Tonacatepegue. Unpublished thesis for the Facultad de Ciencias Agron6micas, Universidad de El Salvador, Oct. 1967. Study of a sample of 35 cultivator families selected from 352 families covered by the extension service in Tonacatepeque, situated 16 kms. northwest of San Salvador. Time/frame: 20-30 June 1967; crop and livestock sales 12 months previous to interview. Method: interview of heads of families. QI. Data were collected in following fields: demography, change of residence, occupation, income, land Stenure, education, housing and possessions, means of tranq­ port, health and hygiene, public services, social particiL' pation. After collecting his data, the writer applied the follow­ ing formula to each data series (which he attributed to: G. Coll.azo-Collazo, J. Rios, and Ch. Ramsey, "Development of a Level of Living Scale for Puerto Rico Rural Families," Rio Piedras: University of Puerto Rico, Agricultural Ex­ periment Station Bulletin No. 156, 1960.):

posesi6n si no alto a b ingreso bajo c d de donde

0 ad - bc = (a+b)(c+d)(a+c)(b+d)

wher'e a, b, c, d are number of families having the character­ istic. He then correlated 0 with income and ranked the characteristics by degree of correlation.

142. El Salvador. Comisi6n Nacional de Poblaci6n y Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Cynsos. Muestra Nacional de Hogares. Encuesta de Mano de Obra. San Salvador, n.d. Questionnaire. National sample survey of .3,600 urban and 2,800 rural households. First round:. 1975. Two Phrther roun~ds planned for 1976. 54. 1.Muestra Nacional de Hogares. Encuesta do Migraci6n Tnternt YFecundidad. San Salvador, n.d. Questionnaire. National sample survey of 3,600 urban and 2,800 rural households. First round: 1975. Two further rounds planned for 1976.

ifl. ___.Muestra Nacional do Hogares. Caracterlsticas Generales de la Vivienda. San Salvador, n.d. Questionnaire. National sample survey of 3,600 urban and 2,800 rural households. First round: 1975. Two further rounds planned for 1976. 145. El Salvador. Consejo Nacional de Planificaci6n y Coordinaci6n Econ6mica (and) Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Disefgo de la Muestra Nacional do Hogares. Serie de Muestrario Publicacion No. 2. San Salvador, Nov. 1975. A methodological document. 146. El Salvador. Ministerio de Educaci6n. Oficina de Planeamiento y Organizaci6n (ODEPOR). Analisis Sectorial de la Educaci6n. Documento Estadistico de Trabajo No. 3. Estimaciones de Resultados de la Prueba Nacional de los Estudiantes do Educaci6n. Basica y Estimaciones de Fadtores Sociales, Econ6micos y Culturales de Sus Hogares - Basadas en una Sub-Muestra de Estudiantes. San Salvador, n.d. Gives results of a large-sample survey of primary school students including from rural households. Time frame: Oct. 1974. QI. Contains questions on diet, exposure to media. 147. El Salvador. Consejo Nacional;de Planificaci..n y Coordinaci6 Econ6mica (and) Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Algunas Caracteristicas Educacionales de la Poblaci6n Salvadorefia. San Salvador, Jan. 1976. Gives some results of (146) and some comparisons with 1971 census data. 118. El Salvador. Ministerio de Educaci6n. Oficina de Planeamiento y Organizaci6n (ODEPOR). An~lisis Sectorial de la Educaci6n. Documento Estadstico de Trabajo No. 1. Resultados Estadisticos de la Encuesta de Audencia. Muestreo -or Cuotas. San Salvador, Nov. 1975. Gives results of a large national sample survey of heads of 5,315 urban and 1,934 rural households dealing with exposure ito mer2ia. -. 149. El Salvador. Comisi6n Nacional de Poblaci6n y Direcci6n General do Estadistica y Censos. National family budget sample survey, forthcoming.' Planned to take place in 1977. Questionnaire designed. 55.

150. Banco de Fomento Agropecuario. Costos de Produccion 1976-77, San Salvador. (Typewritten report) Contains costs of production of: ma~z (semilla, comercial, criollo), maicillo (tecnificado, criollo), frijol (solo, asociado), arroz, algod6n, ajonjol, sandla, mel6n, papa, cebolla, tomato, chile, cltricos, pla'tano (siembra, comercial), caria de azucar (para establecimiento, para comercio).

151. El Salvador. Ministerio de Salud Pblica y Asistencia Social. Questionnaire. The health posts of the ministry forward data on a regular basis on the following data series: morbidity, new water pipes installed, new water outlets installed, new latrines installed, clinical measurement of nutrition.

152. U.S. Public Health Service, Center for Disease Control. Centro de Investigaciones de Enfermedades Tropicales en America Central (CIETAC)/Central American Research Station (CARS). Unpublished large-sample survey of nutritional status of La Paz Department, El Salvador. Information was supplied by Dr. Fred Trowbridge, Plantel del I.V.U., San Salvador. Data collected at 120 sample sites. Time frame: Jan. - Feb. 1976. Sampling method: random sample using proability proportional to population (including both urban and rural). Anthropo­ metric and diet data. Data in process at CDC, Atlanta. First results expected to be available at end of April 1976. One of the purposes of this study was to test the hypothesis that a significant regional difference in incidence of malnourished children exists in La Paz Department. Clinical data of the Ministry of Public Health (see (151)) dating from 1972, 1974, and 1975 had revealed a systematic variation: people living in the hill belt in the north, a region of small "subsistence" farms with poor communications, showed a higher incidence of malnourished children than those living in the southern, coastal belt, a region where the main source of liveli­ hood is wage labor on the cotton and sugar cane estates, and an even higher incidence of infant malnutrition than those living in the middle belt. The difference was thought to be attributable to the existence of the Coastal Highway, which runs east-west through the center of the middle belt; because of'this highway and its feeder roads, no family living in the middle belt is distant more than 15 minutes by c'r from a government health post. (The data for 1973 were thrown away because the ministry had fallen so-far behind in tabulating work. The data for 1.972, 1974 and l975"'were punched on cards and sent to CDC, Atlanta for' analysis.)' Finding of non-significant dif­

ference would cast doubt on the value of recording clinical .. L data as theministry does now. • . • :: ;:" ....?'.i (."1 :'. 56. 153. • Unpubliished study of nutritional status of a population in La Libertad, Department, El Salvador. Information supplied by Dr. Trowbridge. This is an intensive study of 5,000 people living in the Toluca area of La Libertad. The population is under intensive demo­ graphic surveillance; births and deaths are registered, investigators track people's movements on a monthly basis. The survey will serve as a test of field methods comparing clinical measurements of malnutrition with anthropometry. 154. • Unpublished study of seasonal changes in the nutritional status of a population in La Libertad Depart­ ment, El Salvador. Information supplied by Dr. Trowbridge. Random of pre-school sample children selected from the same population as (153). Time frame: nutrition status is to be studied at the following intervals: June 1975, Sept. 1975, Dec. 1975, and March 1976. The study is expected to reveal the seasonal variation of malnutrition in children, if any, resulting from the fact that the population lives in an area of large cotton and sugar cane estates which provide wage labor at harvest time (October - January) and therefore concentrate the flow of income of landless laborers, possibly unbalancing their flow of expenditure on foods for family members.

155. El Salvador. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia. Direcci6n General de Obras de Riego y Drenaje. Departa­ mento de Estudios. Secci6n Agroeconomia. Formulario para Estudios de Comunidades. Questionnaire used for preliminary study of communities where the ministry proposes to initiate irrigation and drainage projects. Used in 1975 in Chalchuapa - Atiquizaya. 156. El Salvador. Banco Central de Reserva. Unpublished Typed data. sheets containing national average farm-gate prices, annually for 1950 - 1966. 157. El Salvador. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia. Oficina Sectorial de Planificaci6n Agropecuaria. Reportedlyhas farm prices. Not verified. 158. Programa de Fomento y Cooperaci6n Comunal porEsfuerzos Propio y Ayuda Mutua (FOCCO). Investigaci6n sobre Ila Situaci6n Econ6mica y Social de las Familias Rurales en El Salvador. Comisi6n Nacional de Desarrollo Comunal, Proyecto ELS/73/003 Naciones Unidas, San Salvad6r, Oct. 1975. Questionnaire. Method: interview with heads of house­ holds. Unpublished data. Time frame: agricultural year 1 May 1974 - 30 April 1975. Question on possession of a radio, but this alone was. considered insufficient to be a measure of non-formal education. Sample size: 2,000 households distributed nationally. 57.

159. El Salvador. Ministerlo de Agrieultura y Ganaduria. Direcci6n General de Obras de Riu o y Drenaje. Departa­ mento de Estudios. Secci6n AgroecuoncunAa. 'Tnvestigac.iot Agro-Socio-Economica, Proyecto Atioco, Julio 1972. San Salvador, 1972. • Report of a study based on interviews with heads of 619 households affected by an irrigation/drainage project on 3,668 ha. in Atiocoyo Department. Time frame: field work 17 July 1972 - 9 Aug. 1972 (22 enumerators), manual tabulation of data 10 Aug. 1972 - 9 Sept. 1972 (12 persons). This is a mixed farming area, growing corn, sorghum, rice and vegetables.

160. _ . Investigaci6n sobre Servicio; d Anoyo a l.a Pro­ ducci6n, 0)strito de Riego y Avenomiento No. , Zapotitin. San Salvaaor, Aug. 1972. Despite title, this study contains valuable information on costs *of production, prices, opinions of small farmers, flows to market, income, credit, labor input requirements, and so forth. The study is based on interviews with 412 cultivators. Time frame: field work 17 Sept. 1972 - 30 Sept. 1972 (7 enumerators), manual tabulation of data 2 Oct. 1972 - 18 Nov. 1972 (8 persons). See also (137).

161. . Investigaci6n Agro-Socio-Ecn~ica, Pryecto Sonsonate - Banderas. Agosto 1973. No. 5. San Salvador, Aug. 1973. Study based on interviews with heads of 1,198 house­ holds in a sugar cane and cotton growing coastal area of 8,040 ha. in Sonsonate Department, of which 5,05h ha. are irrigated. Time frame: field work, 23 July 1973 - 24 Aug. 1973 (12 enumerators), manual tabulation of data 27 Aug. 1973 - 28 Sept. 1973 (12 persons). QI.

162. . Investigaci6n Agroecon6mica, Proyeeto do Riego y Avenamiento Sonsonate - Banderas. No. . San alvador, Aug. 1973. Study based on interviews with 77 cultivators farming a total of 6,196 ha. (77 per cent of area of the project) in same general area as (161). A note states that more than one-.uarter of this area was planted to sugar cane on a rental basis and at time of study no one was available to be interviewed. Time frame: field work 24 July 1973 ­ 11 Aug. 1973 (6 enumerators plus 1 supervisor), manual tabulation of data 28 Aug. 1973 - 26 Oct. 1973 (3 pcrsons). S., .... -QI. Questions refer to "present cropping season" and. "previouscropping season.'' 58.

163. El Salvador. Miniterio de PrCK ultura y Ganaderla. Oficina Rectorial de Planificaci6n Agropecuaria. Custo3 du Producci6n do Grano: Basicor y Cultivos Tradiclonalps de Exportacion. San Salvador, May 1975. ineo r aphe, .d) Costs of production of corn (3 levels of technology), sorghum (3 levels of technology), frijol (different crops), rice (3 levels of technology), coffee (3 levels of tech­ nology), cotton, and sugar cane (2 levels of technology). 164. Catholic Relief Services. Pre-School Malnutrition in Rural El Salvador. San Salvador, Jan. 1975. (Typewritten). Information supplied by Steve Otto, CRS, San Salvador. A study of 213 pre-schbol children in 'U l' oimuhities in Department, El Salvador, based on anthropo­ metric data. Analysis of the data revealed an incidence of Y per cent of second and third degree malnutrition. The results compared unfavorably with the 1965 INCAP nutrition study of El Salvador (see (277)). The communities sampled were not particularly disadvantaged, however, in terms of their environment or history;in fact they had had the benefit of two or three years of the presence of village­ level nutrition workers.

165. . Study of nutrition status of pre-school children, forthcoming. A study of a nation-wide sample of 2,250 children aged 4 years or less. Sample to be at least three-quarters rural. Data collection to start in March 1976 and to last two years. Method: recordings of body weight only to be made at six­ month intervals in total of b5 centers (32 regular MCH centers plus 13 villages that have been in the nutrition education program supported for some time by CRS). Recordings to be made by a special team using a special scale, thereby ensuring control. 166. El Salvador. Ministerio de Economia. Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Tercer Censo Nacional de Poblaci6n 1961. San Salvador, June 1965. Census results. Time frame: 2 - 16 May 1961 in rural areas. QNI,

167. Instituto Interamericano de Ciencias Agrioas de la OEA. Centro do Ensefianza e Investigaci6n. Turrialba, Costa Cuestionario. Rica. Encuesta sobre Inresos de los Negocios Agricolas en la Zona del Proyecto de Riego y Drenaje de la Cuenca Baja del Rio Grande de San Miguel,. Usulutin, El Salvador. Questionnaire. Time frame: 15 Feb. 1967 - 15 Feb. 1968. J:9.

168. Honduras. Ministerio de Recursos Naturales. Direcci6n de Planificaci6n Sectorial. Departamento de Economia Agr.iccla y Estadisticas Agricolas. Questionnaire. Information supplied by Lic. Jorge lHernan Ga s, DEAEA, Comayagaela. Use of this questionnaire, complete with instructions to the extension agents who are expected to fill it out and forward it to the ministry on a monthly basis, represents a major effort to collect farm-gate prices. It has been under way on a trial basis since Aug. 1975. Prices are obtained by asking farmers what were the maximum, minimum, and most frequently observed prices during the month. Questionnaire lists corn, beans, sorghum, and rice, and leaves space for listing other crops. The price questions have been added to the production questionnaire. Here, all crops are categorized by three levels of technology: "tradicional," "semi-teenificada", and "tecnificada." The first means no use of machinery, chemical fertilizer, *improved seed, or pesticides. Data series refer to area sown to each crop, estimated area of crop failure, area already harvested, and area to be harvested; expected yield, and total production expected, aggregated for the area of the extension agent's responsibility. No attempt is made to identify cultivators. A final question in this section refers to the month in which most of each crop is expected to be harvested. The reliability of the data collected by this survey would seem to be subject to the usual caveats about using extension agents as investigators.

169. Instituto de Nutrici6n de Centro Am6rica y Panam6 (INCAP). Oficina de Investigaciones Internacionales de los Institutos Nacionales de Salud (EEUU). Ministerio de Salud PNblica y Asistencia Social. Evaluaci6n Nutricional de la Poblaci6n de Centro America y Panami. Honduras. INCAP V-29. N.p., 1969. A multi-faceted survey based on a 1.8 per cent sample of the total population of Honduras, divided into San P.edro Sula as "representative of the urban population" and other localities said to be representative of the "rural popula­ tion." Techniques used included clinical nutritional examination of 3,654 persons, 17 different anthropometric measurements, and description of environment. Also a biochemical study of a sub-sample. Also two questionnaire methods of diet study applied to 5 families in each of what I deduce to be 28 localities representative of the "rural population." Time frame: Sept. - Nov. 1966. Diet data were collected by (1) recordatorio de 21 horas and (2) mtodo dc registro. de 3 dfas. The smaller sample size involved in the diet component of the survey has led observers to deduce that those data are less reliable than the biochemical and clinical­ anthropome.tric data • generated. Criticism has been made of the:preparation, training and supervision7 of the field interviewers. The volume, which forms one.of a series -(see also 243), is unfortunately weak on discussion of methodology chokjen and sample construction. I70. Honduras. Secretara de Economla y Hacienda. Direcc6n Genera] de Estadlstica y Censos. Consejo Superior de Pian:ificaci6r Economica. Institute de Investigaciones (Miriiterio de Trabajo). Tnstibuto de Investigaciones Econ6micas (Facultad de Economia, Tegucigalpa). Banco Central de Monduras. Encuesta de Presupuestos Familiares. Questionnaire. A questionnaire used in a national sample survey of 1,760 households, rural and urban. Time frame: April 1967 - April 1968. Method: the questionnaire was applied to an "informante." Also it identified the head of the house­ hold. Food purchases detailed for each day of one week. For rural households, the questionnaire gets data on production and disposal, including home consumption. "It is probably the most comprehensive and precise socio-economic study of the Honduran family to date." (Bastiaan Schouten, writen comment, June 1975) According to (309), the preparation and field work alone cost $63,000 and involved about 27 man-year equi­ valents of qualified personnel, of which 21 man-years were spent in interviewing. The methodology is described in C. E. Osorio, Investi._acf6n nor Muestreo de Ingresos y Gastos Familias de las n Honduras, unpublished thesis for Facultad de Ciencias Econ6micas, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Honduras, 1969. See also (187).

171. Honduras. Secretarla de Economla. Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Censo Nacional Agropecuario 1974. Questionnaire. This is the third agricultural census. Method: inter­ view of the operator of the holding (la finca censal) with notation of relationship of informant to operator if other. Time frame: I May 1973 - 30 April 1974. Land tenure classes in Honduran censuses are discussed in a separate note at the end of this inventory. The results of this census are expected to be published "in two or three months." One volume of preliminary tabulations has been published: Ministerio de Economla, Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Tercer Censo Nacional Agropecuario Agosto 1974. Cifras Preliminares. Maz., Fri..ol, Arroz Maicillo: Superficie y Sembrada y Producci6n. Ganado Bovineo y Porcin. Per Deartamento y Iviunicipio. Tegucigalpa, Jan. 1975.

172. Honduras. Ministerio do Econoin-a. Direcci6n General de Estad.Tstica y Censos. Censo Nacional de Poblaci6n y Vivienda Marzo de 1974. _Questionnaire. This is the population census. Time frame: March 1974. A volume of preliminary results has been Secretarla published: de Econom 'a. Direcci6n General de Estadlstica y Censos. Censo Nacional de Poblaci6n y Vivienda Cifras Preliminares. Tgetucigalpa, Jan. 1975. 61.

173. Honduras. Secretaria de Economia. Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Instituto Hondureno del Cafr. Censo Nacional Cafetalero 1973. Questionnaire. Method: interview cf operator of coffee-producing holding. Time frame: agricultural year 1972 - 1973. Data series inventories refer to cof'fee crop only, except for cropping pattern. Harvest and sales data dis­ aggregated by month. Wages specified in terms of quantities harvested. This is a very detailed questionnaire.

174. Honduras. Secretaria de EconomTa y Hacienda. Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Segundo Censo Agropecuario 1965 - 66. N.p., n.d. 'This is the published volume of the results of the second agricultural census. Method: interview of the operator-of the holding. Time frame: 1 May 1965 - 30 April I. 1966. QI. Contains a very clear set of instructions to enumerators.

175. Honduras. Ministerio de Gobernaci6n, Justicia, Sanidad y Beneficencia. Direcci6n General de Censos y Egtadisticas. Departamento de Censos. Primer Censo Agropecuario 1952. San Salvador (sic.), Dec. 1954. This is the volume of published results of the first agricultural census in Honduras. QI. Time frame: 15 March 1951 - 14 March 1952. Method: same as (171). Also gives computer card punching key.

176. Honduras. Secretaria de Economia y Hacienda. Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Encuesta Demogrifica Nacional (EDENH) 1970 - 1972. Questionnaire. Published results from this survey have been published as follows by the Centro Latinamericano de Demografia (CELADE), San Jos6 (Costa Rica): Fasciculo I, Guillermo A. MaCci6, Informe General (Jan. 1975), QI; Fasciculo I, Jorge L. Somoza (and) Abel Packer, Resultados y Elaboraci6n de Datos (April 1975); Fascicuio III, Zulma C. Camisa, Fecundidad yNupcialidad (May 1975); Fasciculo IV, Antonio Ortega (and) Manuel Rinc6n, Mortalidad (Aug. 1975); Fasciculo V, Jorge Ar6valo Migraciones (Oct. 1975); Fasciculo VI, Albino Bocaz, Descripci6n de la Muestra (Oct. 1975); a seventh volume, titled Anailisis de Preguntas Retrosnectivas, was.not seen. This was a sample survey of 11,268 urban and 23,176 rural perons from all areas of Honduras except the eastern third of the country and the Islas do la Bahia. Method and time frame: repeated interviews with heads of sample house­ holds during th period 7 Dec.. 1970 - 31, Oct. 1972. Personnel used: 8 enumerators, A supervisors, 1 UN resident adviser, 1 national director. Costs: see below. COSTS OF THE EDENH (In US$)

iter Preparatory First Second Third ourth Total Phase Vjisit Visit ii

Sal 5,225 I6,00 6,600 o 3 2:5 i d lodging 5,770 , h 5,4, 7 62,02 . , i e n t a tr:iz-ort ation 1,700 1,1481 2,267 ,,cT­ a-and c p.,bishing2,767 5,950 ,0 00 ,o-qc -bO L-1Toa 15,462 19,439 18,925 1 ,9 6 25,53O 92,->

U. advs-r's salary 4 ,0Jo0 p.a. 52 ,O0

Other ;echnical assistance (r LA.DE) 6,000

:OTAL 157,350

Source: Fasciculo I, p. 44, Table 10. 63.

177. Censo Nacional do Honduras. (Unnumbered volume) Caracteristica,; Generales y Eduvrativas de Ia Poblaci6n. Abril 1961. Teguciga1pa, Duc. 1964. (Unnumbered volume) Caracteristicas Econolicas de Ia Poblaci6n. Abril 1961. Tegucigalpa, Dec. 196h. Results of the 1961 census.

178. ATAC. Investigaci6n sobre Pequeios Agricultores. 1975. Questionnaire. A policy-oriented survey being done in Honduras by ATAC under contract with AID/ Explanatory information was provided by William H. Rusch, ATAC, Comayagiela, and Dr. Ronald V. Curtis, USAID/Honduras. Time frame: agricultural year 1975. Contains question: "Who is the farm manager?" with alternative answers: head of household (male); head of household (female); both; other man; other woman; manager outside the household. Sharing of cost of non-land inputs (seed, fertilizer, etc.) derivable from data generated on rent/sharecropping arrangements. Also question on squatting. Question on estimated total capital value of farm, including land. Disaggregates labor input for each crop by family/ hired labor and by age and sex for household members. Same for off-farm work performed by household members, and income of each from each type of such work is specified. Contains question on migratory work by household members. Much thought has obviously been given to the elaboration of this questionnaire. One minor fault, however, would seem to be the failure to distinguish between production credit and credit for consumption purposes: the relevant questions ask total borrowings, presumably for all pur­ poses (33. and 35) and total debt at time of interview, excluding business other than agriculture as well as urban investments (36). Total 516 data fields.: Data collection in progress.. Data processing will be done out of country. Initial benchmark survey covers 5 groups: (1) model asentamientos (chosen by the government; complete census); (2) non-model asentamientos; (3) cooperatives; (4) indivi­ dual credit users; (5) control group (no credit use). After one year a re-survey is planned of model asentamientos. After two years a re-survey of model asentamientos and new model asentamientos and cooperatives. After three years a re-survey.of model asentamientos and non-model asentamientos. After four years a re-survey of model asentamientos, new model asentamientos, non-model asentamientos, cooperatives, individual credit users, and the control group.

179. Honduras. SecretarTa de Economia. Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Instituto Hondureno del Cafe. Encuesta de Pron6stico de Cosecha. Ca,:. Questionnaire. Annual survey. Time frame: three times per year coinciding with phases of 'crop.

180. Honduras. Ministerio du Recursos Natura, es. Efectos de la Mecarnizaci 6 n Agr1cola en Cooperativas y Asentamientos. Boleta do Campo. Questionnaire for a sample survey of some 300 of these collectivities. Time frame: field work presently in progress; data analysis expected, in May 1976. Unit of reference: the asentamiento or cooperative. Information on methodology furnished by Felipe Vinicio Espinoza Guzmin, actuarial statistician, Banco Central de Honduras. Personnel recruited by the Ministerio de Recursos Naturales include 6 enumerators. Sample size: 300 asentamientos, representing about half of the total number of asentamientos in the three regions under investigation: Norte, Sur, Olancho. The attempt is to stratify by sin"e of holding and to get 100 sample asentamientos in each of 3 categories of technology: hand power, animal power, and tractor (at least one tractor operation per crop) power. AID financing is involved here.

181. Honduras. Ministerio de Economia. Direcci6n General de Estadistica yr Censos. Ministerio de Recuvsos Naturales. Direcci6n General de Desarrollo Rural. Direcci6n General de Agricultura y Ganaderia. Encuesta Agricola 1971. (Granos Basicos, Inversiones en la Agricultura e Insumo). Questionnaire. Questionnaire used in a national sample survey of 10,000 cultivators representing about 5 per cent of the population defined by the agricultural census of 1965. Contains question who manages farm. Time frame: agricultural year 1971. Much space devoted to capital investment of the farm. No questions on agricultural labor.

182. Honduras. Ministerio de Economia. Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Secci6n Agropecuaria. Encuesta de Tasas Ganaderas (1975 - 1976). Questionnaire. Basically a survey of livestock and livestock products intended to permit calculation of mortality rates and other technical matters. Method: four consecutive visits to each producer.

183. Honduras. Ministerio de Recursos Naturales. Direcci6n de Planificaci6n Sectorial. Departamento de Estadisticas Agricolas. Ministerio de Economia. Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Departamento de Estadisticas Agropecuarias. Encuesta de Pron6stico de Cosechas de Granos Basicos. Questionnaire. A questionnaire used for surveying producers of beans, corn, rice, and sorghum, but also including questions on production of other crops. Method: interview of cultivators. Questions on use of improved seed. Brief (3 pages). Data presently being gathered. 65.

18h4 . Hona& ras. Ministerio do Econom1.j. Direcci6n General de .3tadlstica y Censos. Departamento do Estadlsticas *Agropecuarias. Encuesta de Dafios Causados nor e. Huracqrn "Fifi". Questionnaire. Survey :f producers designed to measure impact of Hurricane Fifi in 197b. Time frame: questions refer to state of affairs as of 1 Sept. 1974 (before the hurricane) and 15 Sept. 1974 (after). Compares areas sown with areas expected to be harvested, livestock inventory before and after, and permanent agricultural labor force (family and hired) before and after. Results not evaluated, but would appear to show a capability for fielding a farm survey operation at short notice. Publication: Cifras de los Dafios Causados por el Hurac n Fifi en el Sector Agropecuario March 1975.

185. Honduras. Secertarla de Economla. Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos."Tomate. Questionnaire. Questionnaire used in a survey of tomato-producers. Time frame: agricultural year 1 May 1971 - 30 April 1972. Contains questions on calendar of production, labor utilization.

186. . Cebolla. Questionnaire. Similar to (185).

187. Honduras. Secretarla de Economia y Hacienda. Direcci6n General de Estad'stica y Censos. Encuesta de Hogares. Mano de Obra. Formulario No. h00. Questionnaire. Questionnaire for a labor utilization survey evidently forming part of a larger survey. Method: interview of head of household obtaining data on each member of household. Marco Tulia Cortes, DGEC, Comayagdela, says this was undoubtedly part of the same survey as (170), but as he was not in charge then he cannot be absolutely certain.

188. Honduras. Mlinisterio de Economia. Direcci6n General de Estad'stica y Censos. Household survey, forthcoming. Information supplied by Angel Diiz, FAQ adviser to DGEC, Comayagdela. Data series to be collectLd include income and' food consumption. Work expacted to begin in late 1976. New questionnaire is to be designed.

189. Patronato Nacional de la Infancia. El Niflo Hondurefio. Las Condiciones Bio-Psico Sociales del Niro deO 0-15 Afios en Honduras. Estudio del Ni-o. Informe Final. Tegucigalpa, 3 vols., April 1975.. Only 3 of'li planned volumes have been published. as of this date. The fourth, containing results, has been withheld, reportedly because of the. controversial nature of the findings.

A commission is said to have" been appointed to study the *. matter. Sample: national. Sample Size: 2,901 households in 66. 20 municipios, of which more than 1,000 are in the municipios of' Tegucigalpa and San Pedro Sula. Method: the data series sought by the investigators were very ambitious; these included application of the following tests (by age groups): Evolution of Gessel (0-3); Lorenzo Filho (5-8); Inventory of personal adaptation of Rogers (8-15); Raven (5-15); N.E.14.I. (3-15). Time frame: field work April 197h - Nov. 197h. Vol. I contains a description of the survey and cussion of dis- methodology. Vol. II (missing) contains dis­ cussion of results. Vol. III (misnumbered II on outer jacket) contains tables of data. Vol. IV (misnumbered III on outer jacket) contains tables of data. 190. Organization of American States (OAS). Mapa Parcial de Honduras. Clasificaci6n de la Tierra. 1962. This is said to be the best land classification map of Honduras at present. INA is working on a new cadastral survey of Honduras which will make possible a detailed land use map. 191. Melba Z iiga. La Familia Campesina. Tegucigalpa: Instituto de Investigaciones Socio-Econ6micas, Jan. 1975. The author gives us an impressionistic account peasant's of the' view of the world and family life, including many quotes and an account of a typical day, gleaned from her travels through southern Honduras. 192. USAID/Honduras. Study of rural pilot schools in 3 villages in Honduras, forthcoming. In 1972 the government of Honduras began establishing a program of rural pilot schools in which the curriculum at the primary level was geared to agriculture. This is planned a study of such schools by John Kelly, anthropologist, and Marcie Bernbaum, psychologist. The study is to form part of a USAID education sub-sector assessment due for completion by April 30, 1976.

193. Honduras. Catastro Nacional. This is the repository of juridical data on landholding in Honduras. 19)1. Robert A. White. The Adult Education Program of Acci6n Cultural Popular Hondure~ia. An Evaluation of the Development Rural Potential of' the Radio School Movement Honduras. in Full Report. St. Louis, Missouri: Department Anthropology of and Sociology, St. Louis University; Teguci­ galpa: Centro Loyola. 2 vols. Oct. 1972. Report of the results of a survey of a sample individuals of 613 in 15 communities "which was judged to represent various degrees of success of the radio schools" (Vol. I, p). 197). Method: questionnaire interview. QI. 67.

195. Rodney C. Stares. La Economia Camesina en la Zona Sur de Honduras 1950 - 1970; S Dsarrollo -P-- civas para el Futuro. Report presented to the prelatura of Choluteca, Sept. 1972. (Mimeographed) Stares is an economist. He has produced a thorough study of the economic evolution of a large rural rotgion comprisingf, the departments of Choluteca and Valle. Contains analysis based on Stares' unpublished study, Estudio de Ingresos y Gastos Familiares en la Zona Sur de 'Honduras, Choluteca, Oct. 1971; on unpublished data collected by the Equipo Socio-Econ6micoReligioso Choluteca in 1970, and on White's data (see (207)). Maps. Contains many insights into the vicioui; circle of rural poverty.

196. Gretz, en Eoff. Evaluation Study of the Impact on Campesinos of i1lie Instituto Nacional Agrario/International Pevelonment Foundation Agrarian Reform and Social Development Programs in Honduras. Tegucigalpa, Sept. 1970. (Mimeographed) Reports verbatim conversations with campesinos who were included in a random sample of 591 heads of households in 4 widely separated regions of Honduras by h interviewers. Method: unstructured and semi-structured interviews, census taking, observation, and participation. Interviews lasted from 15 minutes to several hours each. Includes illustrative sketches of rural poor households encountered.

197. Honduras. Ministerio de Recursos Naturales. Direcci6n de Planificaci6n Sectorial. Departamento de Anglisis Sectorial Agr~cola. Proyecto de Ana'lisis del Sector Agricola. Boleta de Encuestas. Forma A.S.A. 1. 27/11/75. Building on previous experience of cost of production surveys in Honduras and attempting to systematize these, the D.A.S.A. has since March 1975 been carrying out cost of production surveys intended to generate data for sector analysis. The methods used were explained by Carlos Andr6as Zelaya, D.A.S.A., Comayagaela. The method used is called judgment sampling. A small region of the country is selected for survey work. Within this small region, sub-regions consisting of a number of ecologically relatively homogeneous agriciltural zones are defined. For data collection on the main crops, a greater number of rather ,hrrowly defined zones are defined within the sub-region. For less important crops, a lesser number of more broadly defined zones are defined. In other words, crops exhibiting different levels of technology are further distinguished. The size of the sampling frame varies among crops and the unit of reference within the sampling frame is the crop defined by level of technology. Cropwise the number of' sample units is roughly proportional to the S,importance of the crop wit in the sub-region. Within each sampling frame, 6,'.8, or 10 questionnaires are completed by means of interviews with cultivators. Data relate to one crop year. DatI a' series include calendar o'f input use (including family and hired labor), input quantities and Prices of all inputs including 'land rent (in cash only, 68. unfortunately!) and wages, output and disposal of output (with calendar) and output prices. Data would have been more useful if they had included a series on beginning and end inventories of crops stored on farm, Generally speaking this level of disaggregation makes the results more useful than national averages, e.g. (163). Data processing takes place in country. 198. _ . Honduras: Precios de Insumos y Maquinaria Agricola 1972 ­ 1974 Proyectados a 1975. Tegucigalpa, Jan. 1975. (mimeographed) A very complete typewritten list, 10 pages long (single spaced) giving input prices obtained directly from com­ mercial outlets of supply to farmers. Many are obviously of little relevance to small farmers, but on the other hand a machete No. 864/24 Tuncos cost 3.90 Lempiras in Nov. 1974. 199. AID. Capital Assistance Paper for Honduras. Loan 024. Annex II, Exhibit 18. Letter from Planning Council dated May 6, 1974. This 10-page, single spaced typewritten document is the best description of the state of land registry and other records in Honduras that I saw. The document has been included in a capital assistance paper for a loan-financed project presently under way following passage by the government of a law in Dec. 1974 providing for reorganization of the land registry system.

200. Honduras. Ministerio de Recursos Naturales. Direcci6n de Planificaci6n Sectorial. Departamento de Economia Agricola y Estad'sticas Agricolas. Agricultural labor survey, forth­ coming. Lic. Jorge Hernan Gal6as, director of DEAEA, Comayag~iela, said his department has plans to undertake an agricultural labor survey which would gather data on, among other things, wages.

201. Honduras. Ministerio de Salud P6blica. Departamento de Nutrici6n. Evaluaci6n Nutricional de los Grupcs Campesinos del Valle del Bajo Aguan. 1975. Unpublished height and weight data from a survey of 773 children in 5 rural localities in Col6n Department. Infor­ mation supplied by Lic. Indira de Beausset, head of the Department of Nutrition; also for (202 through 204). 202. . Evaluaci6n Nutricional del Municipio de Colomoncagua, ItiTucCi. June 197h. Unpublished height and weight data from a survey of 10) children in a rural locality of Itibuci Department. 203. Evaluaci6n Nutricional en los Municipios de Nueva Ocotepeque, Trinidad y Naranjito. 1972. Unpublished height and weight data from a survey of 9qb6 children in rural-localities in the departments of Ocotepeque, Copan, and Santa Barbara. 20h4 . Evaluaci6n Nutricional del Departamento do 'anta Brbara. 1972. Unpublished height and weight data from a survey of 413 children in rural Santa B~rbara Department.

205. Universidad Autonoma de Honduras. Facultad de MeAcina Preventiva. Evaluaci6n Nutricional de los Munici 1)s San Sebasti'n y Lamari (Comayagua). 197h. Unpublished height and weight data from a survey of 233 children in Ccmayagua Departfient.

206. Guillermo Arroyave, Miguel Guzman, and Marina . Socioeconomic Level of the Family and Nutrition in the Rural Area of Central America and Panama. Unpublished chapter scheduled for publication in Archivos Latin­ americanos de Nutrici6n (Caracas). Information from Drs. Miguel Guzmton, INCAP, and Alfredo Mendez, Universidad del Valle, Guatemala. The authors of this paper were members of the INCAP survey team and according to their written account (P. 7) this study was based on data from a sub-sample of approximately one-half, or 1,841 families, of the total sample in all the six countries surveyed (see (243)). As they state: "The families in whom biochemical and dietary studies were done are included in this group. The basic data for calculating the socioeconomic index were obtained by direct interview of the head of the family conducted by properly trained and standardized field workers." (p. 7) The data series used by the authors to construct their socioeconomic index were: (1) Housing (ownership, type of floor, roof, and kitchen facilities), (2) living space (number of rooms, number of bedrooms and beds in relation to members of the family), (3) sanitary conditions (type of bed, drinking water source, wastage disposal system, disposal of excreta of domestic animals in premise), (4) fo od production at the family level (quantities of product converted to total value by applying relevant prices obtained in the local market), (5) income in cash and total, (6) occupation of the family head, (7) scholariLy (ratio of total number of years of schooling possessed by members of the family to the total number of years of' schooling stipulated by law for persons of similar ages), (8) exposure to communication (radio, television, newspapers, magazines) (Table 2). "Each criterion was scored on a scale of 1.00 (the lowest) to 3.00 (the highest). Maximum total score was 24.00 (8 x 3.00) and minimum 8.00 (8 x 1.00). For the analysis of the dietary and biochemical data the total group of families was subsequently divided into quartil(s. Families in the lowest and highest quartiles were labeled "low" and "high" sccioeconomic index respectively. The rest were classif-d as "medium." A similar procedure was needed . for the intn tion of ;ocioeconomic groups for evaluating the anthropom-etrc data, but in this case tertiles were used. The scoring of the different items used in calculating* the sOciOeconomic index of necessity was based on country specific characteristics invalidating comparisons of the index values between countries, since an index value of 1.5 in Guatemala does not mean the same as a 1,5 value in Costa Rica." (pp. 7-8) Dr. Guzman says that the socioeconomic index values calculated did relate to biochemistry, dietary intake, and anthropometry. "It was uncanny." The methodology of the calculation of the socioeconomic index is reported in Alfredo M6ndez, "M6todo para Medir la Situaci6n Sociocultural de la Familias Rurales Centr­ americanas y Su Aplicaci6n a los Programas de Salud," Archivos Latinamericanos de Nutrici6n, Vol. XX, No. 3, Sept. 1970, pp. 281-291; and Guillermo Arroyave, Alfredo Mendez y Werner Ascoli, "Relaci6n entre Algunos Indices Bioquimicos del Estado Nutricional y Nivel Socio-Cultural de las Familias en el Area 'Rural' de Centro America," ibid., Vol. XX, No. 2, June 1970, pp. 195-216. 207. Robert White, S.J. Estudio de la Capacidad Comunitaria de Tomar Decisiones Colectivas. 1971. (Mimeographed) Unpublished study based on data gathered in Choluteca Department in interviews with 666 individuals in 13 communities.

208. Fundaci6n Hondurefia de Desarrollo (FUNHDESA). Ficha de Investigaci6n de Solicitud de Credito. Information supplied by Lie. Fernando D. Montes, Executive Director, FUNHDESA, a privately run foundation affiliated with the Pan American Foundation. It provides credit to farmer cooperatives which encounter difficulties in obtaining credit elsewhere and which prove they intend to use the funds for worthwhile purposes, including the growing of a particular crop. FUNHDESA also provides credit to some individuals upon ascertaining their background. The procedure is well organized and standardized. The documentation lists the main information required of the prospective borrower, including indebtedness and value of land. Sometimes the loan is repayable in a share of the crop; in this case, another form, Comprobante de Recibo de Cosecha, is given in receipt. 209. El Salvador. Instituto de Colonizaci6n Rural. Polftica Econ6mica del Instituto de Colonizaci6n Rural y Pol.tica de Desarro]lo del Instituto de Colonizaci6n Rural., San Salvador, 1961. The ICR was a predecessor of the Instituto Salvadore~io de Transformaci6n ALJraria (ISTA), the pcec ent agrarian reform institute. This document. contal:i' a detailed study of the size of farm necessary to sustain one rural household. 71.

210. Guatemala. Ministerio de Economia. Direcci6n General de Estadlstica. II Ceno Agropecuario 196A. Guatemala, 5 vols. Results of the second agricultural census. Reference unit: operational holding. Method: interview of cultivator. QI. DGE No. 381j with note that agricultural establishments "dedicated to the raising of (lerge) animals or production of animal products" would be investigated using another questionnaire, II Censo de Vivienda, DGE No. 379, also included. Time frame: agricultural year 1 May 1963 r 30 April 1964. Question on attached workers (mozos colonos) defines them as follows: "todo aquel que vive permanentemente en una finca y que puede a no gozar de una o mas parcelas sin pago alguno; pero con el coipromiso de trabajar durante todo o parte del tiempo en la finca donde tiene su vivienda, recibiendo en pago por su trabaJo parte en especie (raciones) y parte en efectivo, pudiendo ser tambi~n s6lo en efectivo." Vol. I, Caracterlsticas Generales, Concentraci6n y Tenencia de la Tierra, Jan. 1968, contains in addition to tables, maps and graphs, a series of Lorenz Curves showing conaentration of landholding nationally, regionally, and by department, for 1950 and 1964. Vol. II, Uso de la Tierra, Cultivos, April 1971, contains tables, maps, charts. Vol. III, Ganaderia, Jan. 1969, contains tables, maps, charts. Vol. IV, Ayes d Corral, Colmenas, Productos Pecuariosn Eguipo y VMhiculos, Abono y Riegos, Energlfa en Laboren Agricolas, Mozos Colonos, Apendice, April 1969, contains tables, maps, charts. The departments with the largest numbers of mozos colonos; in order, are Alta Ver'paz, Suchitep-quez, Escuintla. Vol. V. Panorama de la Estructura AgLrLecuaria do Guate-: mala, Compendio General, March 1971.

211. Guatemala. Direcci6n General de Estadistica. Censo Agro­ pecuario 1950. Tomo I. Agricultura. Tomo IT. Ganaderia. Guatemala, Dec. 1954 and Aug. 1955. Results of the first agricultural census. Vol. I contains an interesting set of Lorenz Curves showing con­ centration of landholding in Guatemala as a whole, Izabal, Totonicap6n. Also excellent maps of the distribution of major crops.

212. Guatemala. Ministerio de Economa. Dircn General d.. Estadistica. Encuesta Arropecuaria. Julio 1973. Questionnaire. Form DGE No. 538. Information supplied by Li . Marina Calder6n of this office. This is one form used in a sample survey implemented once or twice yearly from 1970 through 1973 using a sample of 5,900 farmzs. According to Lamar Merk's investigation of this data source in 1975, the field work was done by senior students at the Instituto T6cnico do Agricultura and by the mayors of the municipios. Sumple selection procedure is descri1)ed 1 6 n Descric. n Plan ded1 ue.o ~ncuer;ta Ag, pr a ropecuaria J 9-'. Uit of reference: operational holding. TIme frame, i May 1972 - 30 April 1973.

213. Guatemala. Ministerio de Economa. Direcci6n General de Estadlstica. Ministerio de Agricultura. INDECA. Encuesta Agricola de Granos Basicos Mayo 1975. Questionnaire. Form DGE No. 548. This was one of two survey forms that replaced ,(212) beginning in 197)4 (used in May and Nov. 19711 and in May 1975); the other was (214). Unit of reference: operational holding (finca censal o unidad de exnjotaci6n). Method: interview of cultivator. Time frame: Nov. 1974 - April 1975.

214. Guatemala. Ministerio de Economlna. Direcci6n General de Estadstica. Encuesta de Ganado y Productos Pecuarios 1975. Questionnaire. Form DGE No. 542. Unit of reference: operational holding Used in Jan. 1974 and Jan. 1975. 215. Two maps of Guatemala showing (1) gross value of agricultural production per rural inhabitant; and (2) the arithmetic sum of (a) number of farms of less than 2 manzanas per 100 ha., and (b) the number of landless laborers per 100 ha. by municipio using differential coloring. Datzt for each of 324 municipios were derived from 1964 agricultural census (210), and 1974 prices were used. Data shown on maps also exist in tabulated form. 216. Instituto de Nutrici6n de Centro America y Panama (INCAP). Division of Human Development. Tenancia de la Tierra de la Familia Nuclear o Extenso. Questionnaire. Formulario Vida Retrospectiva de Hombres. Description of survey provided by Tim Farrell, anthro­ pologist, INCAP, Guatemala. The survey uses several sources. A complete census of four villages in El Progreso Department, a semi-arid area of small farmers in central Guatemala. Data are at the household level within the aldea. Method: interview with head of household using questionnairv (216) to obtain male retrospective data, supplemented by data generated from a variety of other questionnaires, listed below. Time frame: 1974.

217(. Census. Same sample as (216). Time frame: 1967-75.

2.8. _ Ingreso y Ri!ueza. Questionnaire. This is a second-year follow-up to (216) with same sample. The main interest in designing this questionnaire was to gen­ erate data about cropping pattern changes on a year-to-year ba s i s . 73.

219. Manuel Gollas. Surplus Labor and Economic Development: The Guatemalan Case. Madison, Wisconsin: Land Tenure Center, Research Paper No. 39, Jan. 1970. A production study of 3148 small farms (average size of holding 3 ha., average family income earned in the family's own community $196.50) selected in a number of Highland departments.

220. Lester Schmid. The Role of Migratory Labor in the Economic Development of Guatemala. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1967. A study based on interviews with a purposive sample of 120 seasonal workers on 42 large coffee, sugar and cotton growing estates in Guatemala, obtaining data on the background and living conditions. Time frame: field work Dec. 1965 - March 1966.

221. Tim Farrell. Evaluation of Economic Growth and Community Development in a Highland Guatemalan Town. Department of Anthropology, UCLA, dissertation in process. This is an intensive study of the village of San Lucas Tolimin on the shore of Lake Atitln. Land tenure data were derived from consistency checks among accounts pro­ vided by the older people in the village, who sometimes produced private documents attesting to their ownership of land in the village. All public documents relating to land tenure were destroyed in a fire in the 19110's. Private property in the village dates from the 1860's, when some Indians, with government encouragement, began planting coffee on communal land. This led to conflict with corn growers, with some uprooting of coffee trees taking place. The issue was settled when, under the pressure of the coffee planters, the entire land of the village was surveyed and deeded to members of the community in private ownership. Farrell has had personal acquaintance with the village and its inhabitants since 1969, when he arrived to do field work for his master's thesis. Method: interview with questionnaire. Size of sample: 85 Indian heads of households and 28 Ladino heads of households. Data series are many and include measures of media exposure including measure of understanding, social participation, political awareness, cash expenditures on gifts and religious obligations, parti­ cipation in coffee cooperative, occupational histories, expenditures on food, fiesta expenditures (average $5)4 per year; range: $3 to $350), civil obligations (average $11.50 per year), time spent per day in direct economic endeavor (average 10.9 hours).

222. Instituto. de Nutricion do Centro Am6rica y Panai (THCAP). Division of Human Development. Tenencia de 1.a Tierra de la Familia Nuclear o Extenso. Questionnaire. Formuiario Vida Retrospectiva de Hombres.. The same questionnaire as (216), applied to the village of Petapa south of Guatemala City. fhe village i,; characterized by considerable mobility. Time frame: 197 - 1975. • : ...... ' i...... 74 . 223. . Tngreso y LRqueza. Questionnaire. Same questionnaire as (218), applied to Petapa. Time frame: 1975.

22)1. . Time Budget Questionnaire. Same sample as (216). Method: panel approach. Time frame: 1975.

225. Parents' Expectation Questionnaire. Same sample as (216). Method: cross-sectional. Time frame: 1975 - 1976.

226.

227. . Morbidity Survey Questionnaire. Same sample as (216). Method: fortnightly. Time frame: 1969 - 1976.

228. Community Survey Questionnaire. Same sample as (216). Method: cross-sectional. Time frame: 1975.

229. • Social Stimulation Questionnaire. Same sample as (216). Method: cross-sectional. Time frame: 1974 - 1975. Data reported to be of poor quality.

230. Female Retrospective Questionnaire. Same sample as (216). Time frame: 1974.

231. . Census. Same questionnaire as (217), applied to Petapa. Time frame: 1973- 1975.

232. . Time Budget Questionnaire. Same questionnaire as (224), applied to Petapa. Time frame: 1975.

233. . Parents' Expectation Questionnaire. Same questionnaire as (225), applied to Petapa. Time frame: 1975 - 1976.

23A .

235. Morbidity Survey Questionnaire. Same questionnaire as (227), applied to Petapa. Time frame: 1969 - 1976.

236. . Community Survey Questionnaire. 'Same questionnaire as (228), applied to Petapa. Time frame: 1975.

237. . Social Stimulation Questionnaire. Same questionnaire as (229), applied to Petapa. Time frame: 1970 - 1975. Data reported to be of poor quality. 75.

238. Female Retro ;ective Questionnaire. Same questionnaire as (230), applied Lo Petapa. Time frame: 197h.

239. William H. Rusch, Fred L. Mann, and Eugene Braun Rural Cooperatives in Guatemala: A Study of their Deve]opment and Evaluation of A.I.D. Programs in their fu.port. McLean, Va.: American Technical Assistance Corporation (ATAC), Nov. 1975. Although the introduction to this report states that the survey was "designed primarily to serve the needs of program managers for practical information useful in the further development and administration of rural coopera­ tive programs in Guatemala," the survey generated a wealth of data on small farmer income and production, land tenure, use of credit, labor utilization, and other matters of vital importance to researchers on the rural poverty problem. The survey was carried out under AID contract No. AID/CM-otr-c-73-198 W.O. 15. The data were ed-ited, tabulated and analyzed in the U.S. , and copies of some of the more important computer printouts were furnished to USAID/Guatemala, in addition to the multi-volume final report. The 29-page questionnaire was consulted in the office of Carl Koone, RDO, USAID/Guatemala. (A separate section of the questionnaire dealt with co-ops.) Method: The sample was selected in a two-stage process: (1) selection of co-ops randomly by department; (2) selection of co-op members randomly. Sample size: 601 small farmers who were members of co-ops in the altin]ano of Guatemala and who had received credit and 200 members of match groups (neighbors of co-op members with farms of similar size). Interviews of farmers using questionnaire. Time frame: field work 197.. Data correspond to the agri­ cultural year 197h. Comment: The questions on land tenure have been designed in a very sophisticated manner (the method has been carried over to the design of (178) as well). Small farmers in the altiplano own over 90 per cent of the land they farm. The balance is largely rented for cash and only to a slight extent in sharecropping or labor exchange arrange­ ments, although the last is found to some extent in Chimal­ tenango. The survey methodology shows value of work performed on the landlord's farm as "non-family farm income ' and the equivalent figure is shown as a cost of land rental in the family farm accounts.

240. Guatemala. Ministerio de Agricultura. Direcci6n Genera] de Servicios Agrlcolas (DIGESA). Unpublished data on costs of production, yields, and gross inome of production of corn, beans, rice, wheat, sorghum, and sesame, tabulated by regions and sub-regions, size of operational holding, and cost components, by IBM, Centro de Servicio dK Datos. Also tables on labor input requirements for each operation, tabulated by regions and sub-regions, and size of operational holding. 2ti. .. .. Unpubli -hed frequency distributions of planned and actual input usages, and yields by regions and sub-regions, and size of operational holding for of the crops each listed in (240), printout from IBM, Centro de Servicio de Dates. The data in (240) were derived from DIGESA's follow-up normal field reports on its clients (see (267)) and covered a sample of about 1,700 farms. Time frame: agri­ cultural year 1971, ­ J-975 (1 April 197h - 30 Mar. 1975). In an effort to evaluate the reliability of these data, data on yields and input use from these same farmers' farm plans filed at the time of making credit applications were tabulated side by side with actual observed yields and actual observed inputs used. The discrepancies of input usage are significant in some cases. As the are disaggregated data by crop and by region and sub-region, it is a hypothesis capable of being tested that these dis­ crepancies are the result of diversion of high-value inputs like fertilizer from "subsistence" crops to cash crops. 242. Guatemala. Encuesta del Sector P~blico Agreola. Enero 1974. Questionnaire. Form LASA-AG-l (1-15-74). Questionnaire used in a policy-oriented large-sample survey of about 1,600 small farms in Guatemala. Time frame: data relate to the agricultural year 1973. Questionnaire printed and pre-coded; bound booklet of 47 pages. Methodology: Since one of the principal aims who conducted of those the survey (the Consejo Nacional de Planifi­ caci6n Economica with AID support) was to assess the impact of the small-farmer credit program of the ru:al development bank, BANDESA, the sample was constructed on the basis of matched "credit farms" (i.e. those accepting credit from BANDESA) and "non-credit farms." An enumeration, farms" of "credit was made from BANDESA records of loan applications. These farms were matched one for one by local officials in each of the 16 sub-regions covered by the survey (these ex­ cluded the Peten) on the basis of four characteristics of the "credit farms" recorded at the time they made applica­ tions for loans: (1) area covered by the principal crop; farm size; (3) farmer's age; (L) distance from the nearest town. A random sample of 50 such pairs of farms was then selected in each sub-region for investigation. (Note: although BANDESA data show that most of the bank's loans go to large farmers, the bank's small-farmer credit program is operated from a trust fund and is separate.) Field work occupied two months in the spring of 1974. Interview times ranged from 45 minutes to two and a half hours. Much attention was paid to training of the enumerators, who were regular DIGESA promotnres, and to supervision of field work., A remarkaboe total of 774 out of 800 pairs of questionnaires were Found to be useable. The questionnaire contains 958 data fields. Data and processing editing occurre,? in the U.S. Key to tape processing required only one week, and the error rate was reported to be less than one half of one per cent. Average punching time per questionnaire was reported to be 9 minutes.

M. Institute of Nutrition of Central America and Panama. Nutrition Program, Center for Disease Control, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Nutritional Evaluation of the Population of Central America and Vanama: ReGional Summary. Guatemala, 1971. A summary of results derived from (11), (9-1, (169), (244), and (277), as well as of a similar study in Panama.

244. Instituto de Nutrici6n de Centro Amrica y Panam6 (TNCAP). Oficina de Investigaciones Internacionales de los Institutos Nacionales de Salud (EEUU). Ministerio de Salud Pdblica y Asistencia Social. Evaluaci6n Nutriciona] de ia Poblaci6n de Centro Amfrica y Panam.: Guatema]a,INCAP V-25. N.p ., 1969, Time frame: Feb. - April1965. Sample size: 4,113 individuals, or 0.9 per cent of the total population of Guatemala.

245. Guatemala. Death Certificates, 1964.

246. Guatemala. Consejo Nacional de Planificaci6n Econ6mica. Divisi6n de Recursos Humanos. Questionnaire. This is the questionnaire for a labor force survey planned to have taken place in March-April 1976, but which was put off, probably for at least a year, because of the earthquake of Feb. 3, 1976. The sample had been selected, consisting of about 7,000 households both rural and urban, and the questionnaire was already pre-tested in both areas. According to Lie. Miguel von Hoegen, CNPE. there exists a view that the sample is no longer valid following the changes in residence caused by the earthquake and it may have to be re-designed. The budgeted cost for field work, using enumerators of the Direcci6n General de Estadistica, plus some to be newly recruited and trained, is $130,000. The questionnaire contains many questions on non-formal education, and an addition to the basic question­ naire is used to generate specifically rural data.

247. Guatemala. Secretar~a del Consejo Nacional de Planificaclin Econ6mica. Direcci6n General de Estadlstica. Banco Nacional de la Vivienda. Municipalidad de Guatemala. Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala. Censo de lloqares y Condiciones de Vivienda como Consocuencia de los Sismos do Febrero de 1976. Questionnaire. This is the questionnaire of a special housing survey made immediately following the Feb.. 3, 1976, earthquake in Guatemala City and also in each cabecera municipal and departamental (where conditions are much closer to "rural" than "urban"), using university students as enumerators. 78.

2)18. Guatemala. Intituto Nacional de Comercializaci6n Agr:cola (INDECA). Departamento Investigaci6n Capacitaci6n y Extensi6n de Mercadeo. A]gunos Aspectos de Producci6n y Comercializa­ ci6n de Malz y Frijol en Varias Regiones del Pais. Guatemala, June 1971. As part of a marketing study of corn and beans in Guatemala, the INDECA used a farm-level questionnaire to [,ther data on production, sales, calendar of sales, farm prices, etc. Sample: 10 to 20 per cent mientos of "parcela­ existentes en la regi6n escogida" and similar number of non-"parcelamientos." Time frame: agricultural year 1970 - 3.971. 249. Michael Joseph Rowan. Marketing Systems in a Plural Peasant Society: A Guatemala Case Study. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Georgia (Athens), 1971. A study of HIchuetenango Department in terms of Place Central Theory, 1s:'ng a variety of primary and secondary data sources, ]ncluding questionnaires administered to vendors, shoppers, and persons at home. Time frame: field work summer of 1969. QI. 250. David T. Johnson. Income Potential of Small Farms in Guatemala. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation for Iowa State University, Aug. 1974. Part of the data cited in this study came from a crop production questionnaire. Sample size: 62 small, farmers in 26 different municipios in 8 Highland depart­ mens. Time frame: field work Marcha - June 1973. 251. Guatemala. Direcci'n General de Estadistica. Balances de Disponibilidad/Utilizaci6n de Ma'z - Maicillo, Frijol, Arroz, Trigo; Estimaciones Preliminares. Guatemala, Feb. 1976. A study motivated by the earthquake of Feb. 3, 1976. Production data for period 1 May 1975 to 31 Oct. 1975 derived from a sample survey run by the DGE, Departamento de Censos, in Nov. - Dec. 1975, using same sample as used according in (213), to Pelipe Zaghi Luna, DGE, Punto Focal Nacional. This survey also generated data on forecast production period I for Nov. 1975 to 30 April 1976. Demand was estimated on the basis of FAO coefficients. Sample: The design of the sample is described Selection based as follows: on lists of (1) parcelamientos and (2) other operational holdings. A random sample was selected from (1). (2) was stratified according to size of holding, as follows: (a) ].areer than 100 manzanas (100 per cent sample); (b) 30 - 10Q manzanas; and (c) less than 30 manzanas. For sampling (2b) , municipio in each department were selected proportionate­ - ly to the squarte root of the total area harvested for all crops except cotton; within theselected municipios, enumeration a complete was effected. For (2c), using maps each selected muniipio was- divided into smaller units with well defined boundaries, and in each a predetermined number of operational holdings was selected based on the 1973 population census. 79.

252. Guatemala. Ministerio de Economia. Direccion General d EstadsLtica. VII Censo de Poblaqi6n 1964. Vol. I. Metodolon[a. Poblaci6n Total por Sexoj Edad, Gru po Et. wico, J~rh no-Rul. y Estado Civil. Guatemala, Aug. 1971. Results of census. Questionnaire DGE No. 380. QT, Time frame: 18 April 196b - 27 April 1964. As the numbering of Guatemalan population censuses s rather confusing, here is the historical series: I 1778 II 1880 III 1893 IV 1921 V 1940 VI 1950 VII 1964 VIII 1973

253. . Vol. II. I1 Censo de Vivienda 1964. Viviendas Particulares. Guatemala, June 1973. Results of housing census. Questionnaire DGE No. 379. QI. Time frame: 18 April 1964 - 27 April 1964.

254. __ VIII Censo de Poblaci6n 26 de 1arzo de 1973. Series III, Vol. I. Repjblica: Poblaci6n Total, Poblaci6n Indigena. Guatemala, Aug. 1975. Census results. QI. Time frame: 26 March 1973 - 7 April 1973 in rural areas.

255. III Censo de Vivienda 26 Marzo de 1973. Viviendas Particulares, Numero de Hogares. Guatemala, Feb. 1976. Census results. Questionnaire is to be found in (2514). Time frame: 26 March 1973.

256. _ . Estadisticas Agropecuarias Continuas 1974 - 1975. Guatemala, Nov. 1975. This publication contains 2 tables of average farm prices of 13 crops and 7 other agricultural products, by month of 1974 and by department. No explanatory notes as;-.

to sources of data or methodology. ­

257. Carol Ann Smith. The Domestic Marketing System in Western Guatemala: An Economic, Locational, and Cultulral Analysis. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Stanford University, 1972. A study of market places in the framework of Central Place Theory.

258. Universidad de San Carlos, Instituto de InvestiUgaciones Econ6micas y Sociales. Encuesta sobre Ingrenos I Gantos de la Familia del Cameosaon Avalariado do Guatemala, 1966. Guatemala, n.d. A study of agricultural wage laborers. Method: inter­ views using questionnaire. sample size: i,800 families on 80. 300 farms, stratified by crop. QNI, but list of data series included. Time frame: field work Sept. 1966 ­ Jan. 1967 using 17 full-time enumerators plus 10 part-time enumerators. Costs of the survey, not incl.uding data processing, are given as follows:

A. Personnel Enumerators Q 10,654.67 Jef s de Revisi6n y Revisores Supervisors 10,643.50 B. Training i,490.00 312.00 C. Field Work Food and lodging 10,583.00 Transport D. 1,991.00 Transport and Lodging of Technical Personnel E. Miscellaneous 862.85 5,088.50 TOTAL Q hi1,625.52 (Note: Present exchange rati. Ql = US$1) 259. Comit6 Interamericano de Desarrollo Agricola (CIDA). Tenencia de la Tierra y Desarrollo So -o-Econ6mico del Sector Agr~cola: Guatemala. Washington, D.C., Pan American Union, 1965. This study contains valuable information on the history of land tenure in Guatemala and also CIDA­ generated data on recent changes in land tenure. 260. Gilberto Rios Saenz. C0.stos de Productos Aricolas Fianciados nor el Banco .1968. Naional Arario. Guatemala,

Time frame: 1967(?).

261. Frederico Fahsen, Ricardo Goubaud, and Andrew J. Sherman. Summary of the Study: The Process of Urbanization and Impact on a Developing its Economy - Guatemala. Guatemala, July 1973. This is a summary of a larger, multi-volume report made under an AID contract.

262. Basic Village Education. Questionnaire of base-line interview and follow-up interviews. Details of (262) through (266) supplied by Dr. E. Ray, Program Leader, Howard Guatemala. The BVE is an experimental program currently operating in two areas of Guatemala: a southeast Highlands (i) arc.,, largely Ladino by (2) an altiplano population, and area, largely Indian. It is of data a valuable source for two reasons: (1) it has component, a heavy evaloation and (2) the sample for small evaluation is linited to farmers. It is still fairly recent, has operated however, it in area (1) just 2 years now, and in area (2) '6 months. sample size of about 100 F'or each of the iour groupsn Iu each area at t he end of the exper:ient . Th Four groups are: ( ) group exposed to Ipurposaiye radio broaden st s; (2) group exposed to purposive radio bro:d casts plus act ion of monitors; (3) group exposed to purposive radio broadeasts plus action of monitors plus agricultural technical ass-i.stance in the form of demonstration plots; and (h) control group. The sample is chosen from the population of adult male heads of households who have decision control over an (owfed or rented) operational holding of between 0.5 ;aiid 12.0 manzanaf.. The four sample groups are kept distinct by their gographical separation within each area of the experiment, as in different valleys. The base-line interview is administered to thc' entirc. sample at the beginning of the experiment. Follow-up inter­ views of the entire sample are done each year, using the same questionnaire, Data processing and an:ilysis are currently in the hands of the University of Florida, Tampa and ,Cainesilr,, under ATD contract. Duplicate tabulations are shipp, d to BVE, Guatemala. Analysis reportedly includes efforts to construct indices of change. So far, 63 "evaluation reFports" on specific correlations of variables involved and It "working documents" have been produced. The latter are: Basic Village Evaluation. Guatemala Evaluation Pei..orts. Working Paper No. 1. The General Characteristics of' Subsi,:­ tence Farmers in the Department of JutiaTa, Guatema in. Talatp, F-lorida: University of Florida, Oct. 197 h .

___ Working Paper No. 2. The A ricultural Charnact er­ istics of Subsistence Farmer:- in the De.,.artw..r,nt of Jvtira, Guatemala. Tampa, Florida: University of Florida, Feb. 1975. Working Paper No.; 3. Evaluation of Changes in Knowledge, Attitude and Practices among Subsistence Farmers in the Department of' Jutiapa, Guatemnla: A Time Sampling Methodology. Tampa, Florida: University of Florida, May 1975. ._ Working Paper No. 4. Sumn'ary of the 19711 Year-End Survey of Subsistence Farmers in tie Quezada xperimentlal Area. Tampa, Flor'ida: University of Forida, Dec. 1975.

263. . Production Questionnaire. A one in four or five sub-sample of the sample in (262) is interviewed ,as soon as possible after the harvest to determine crop output per farm,

26b . _ . Radio Listener SUrvc~ Questionnaire. Information is obUtaine' ,,n what radio progras the interviewee listens 'to, Ii-. s, why, (c2c. Th' samle for

this survey is not limited to the ,amp.e in ,262) .re­ quency: three or four times ,;r year in each of the two areas of the experiment. 265. . Weekly Report from Monitors. ThtEe -forms airc onc means' for geu~n ~h~k from monitors and the agronomists who provide technical assistance. The form is a brief, 3-page one with open­ ended questions on environmental factors (e.g. presence of drought in the experiment area), prevailing prices, farmer comments picked up in weekly sessions, etc. Other feedback generators are tape recordings made by monitors, and Friday meetings of monitors with the field agronomist in their area.

266. Direct Test of Felt Need for Education, Since Oct. 1975 the experiment has been using a direct test of felt need for education, including measurement of visual and audio messages, applied at farmers' meetings and individually.

267. Guatemala. Sector Piblico Agricola. Ministerio de Agri­ cultura. Direcci6n General de Servicios Agricolas (DIGESA). Plan Nacional de Devarrolio Rural. Ficha'de Identificaci6n del Agricultor Participante. 0 This is a tightly-spaced, two-page form consistin'g of data blanks used by DIGESA in 1974 and 1975 (and planned for use in 1976) to obtain data from its agents in the field, who are called promotores de ,roducci6n agrieola. There are presently 244 of these. Th'e use of the form was explained by Dr.. Sterling Nichols, adviser, DICES.A, Guate­ mala, who also made available.the relevant instruction sheets. DIGESA looks on its data collection system essentially as a management tool. The cataloguing of information is one of the routine tasks of the promotor in his field work. DIGESA works with farmers who have operational holdings of less than 30 ha. and who have a farm plan worked out in conjunction with the 2romotor. These number about 20 per cent of the total number of farmers in the case of corn growers. Three phases of farmer development are distinduished and DIGESA aims to put every farmer it works with through the three phases! Up to this year, however, it has worked only with farmers in the second phase. Beginning this year, a new system will be implemented covering all three phases and data collection will involve sampling farmers in each phase. In the case of farmers in the first phase, each promotor will work with 120 to 180 farmers. In the case of farmers in the second phase, each promotor will work with about 70 farmers. The ficha (267) will be filled in for sample farmers in all phases on the basis of interviews with the operator. Additionally, separate forms will be used for farmers in the three phases beginning in 1976 (see (268), (269), (270),. and (271)). The data obtained for 1974 and 1975 were found to be of Isuch poor quality as to be a "wipe-out," accycding to Nichols. ... cultores. No. 3. This is a crop reporting form. The sample for the information on this form is drawn from the four to six groups of 30 operators which each promotor is responsible for in this, the first, phase. The data on the form relate to one such group and the form provides space for the "aggregated total in hectares of all the areas that th members of the group possess individually" (I take this to mean "operate"), the aggregated area sown to the crop indicated at the top of the form, the aggregated area of, this crop "maintained," and the aggregated area of this crop harvested.

269. Reporte de Actividades. Fase de'Promoci6n. M1. No. h. The sample of farmers in this, the second, phose is drawn rather differently. Each promoter worls with 60 to 70 farmers. Of these he is responsible for s . lecting a sample of 16 (I= muestra). Again, the form covers one crop, indicated at the top, but this time the information relates to an individual cultivator. The Lromotor is instructed to select his sample of 16 in proportion to the area-sown to each crop: e.g. if corn, beans, rice and sorghum are all sown to equal areas, he will select four farmers to represent each crop; if there are five crops sown, he will select four farmers to repr.esent the most important crop and three to represent each of the other four. The data to be collected here include not only areas but also use of inputs by quantity (including labor and credit) by each operator. On the othershand, the form contains no space for yield or output information. The form also pro­ vides for official sanctioning of BAADESA credit :n specific amounts for specific useL in connection with the cultivation of this crop by the sanple farmer.

270. . Reporte de Actividades. Fase de Promoci6n. FM. No. 4-A. For the h4 to 5) operators excluded from the sample (FM = fuera muestra) in (269), the only information re­ quired is the area sown and the total credit received, for the recording of which the promoter has the choice of listing them singly or as a group by crop; in the latter case he must still list the names of all the operators in the group. This form also has space for official sanctioning of production credit from BADESA.

271. __. Re.te de Visita al Arricultor. Fase de Seguimi ento. M. FM. (chock one). Fase de Formaci6n, M. Nn. 5. Here w; are back to the first phase. The pronotr is instructed to select a sample of 6. The form ic for an individual grower cP one crop, unlike the collective Form of (268). This form also doubles for reporting data on a sample of farmers in the third phase. Each promotor works with about 150 operators in this phase. lie has the choice of 84.

...... d-a:n individualy or colle ct ively; latter case he in the must select a farmer who he thinks "is representative of the same Croup." The total sample size is 16 farmers, covering all represented crops. For non­ sample farmers, only a portion of the data series are required.

272. . Fase de Seguimiento. Unidad de Coo-erativas. No. 6. This is a form to be filled in by the promotor with the cooperative as the unit of reference.

273. . Unpublished data on small farmers. The data here correspond to the data generated by (267), and relate to 1972 and 1973. The quality is said by Nichols to be good. Notes were taken for inventorying pur­ poses from computerized tabulations rather than from question­ naire.

27h. Cuatemala. Sector P6blico Agricola. Instituto Nacional de Comercializaci6n Agricola (INDECA). Encuesta de Producci6n de Granos Basieos, INDECA-UPE-260_75. Questionnaire dated Scpt. 2, 1975. Information supplied by Otto Ren6 Celada C., Programaci6n, Unidad d INDECA, Guatemala. INDECA, the government cereals purchasing and marketing agency, has since 1971 carried out a twice-yearly national sample survey of pro­ duction of basic grains covering all departments except the Pet~n. Each survey gathers data.onathe previous harvest and forecasts of the coming harvest of corn, beans, rice and sorghum. Method: interviews of cultivators using a simple, 2-page questionnaire. Sample size: about 4,200. Sampling method: the country is divided into four ecological zones, roughly corresponding to the four points of the compass. A number of attributes (e.g. siwple vs. multiple cropping; human vs. animal vs. mechanical traction) are used to classify farms growing basic grains, and then from this "mosaic" a total of 30 farms are selected to represent each group of attri­ butes. The sample is scattered about the country using infei'ence from the 196b agricultural census (210), and 307 municipios are included. About 20 per. cent of the sample s. formed of parcelamientos. Randomness of the sample is achieved by interviewing small farmers at the entry points to market towns; large farmers, however, are interviewed on their farms. The survey is carried out in July-August and in November-December. Speed of obtaining results is considered to be important. A professional staff of 5 enumerators takes an average of 5- days to complete the field work. Tabulation by manual means takes another 15 days on average. ~~-- In c ompari-son -with Ithev-s mpip~ u-sed- by -tbe DO (see-U description under (251)), INDECA's sample covers a larger number of municipios but has a sma2ler number of sample farms. Celada's view is that the construction of the sample frame is the most important problem in carrying out a production survey in a country of heterogeneous producers like Guatemala. He believes that to be valid a sample s egment should consist of no more than 20 cultivators. He says INDECA is going to experiment with the DGE's sampling method for carrying out the July-August 1976 survey, but he is not too hopeful of improvement. He says INDELA is also talking to the Instituto Nacional de Geografia about the possibility of using aerial photography to construct the sample frame. As a matter of interest, I asked Celada for his estimate of the proportion of total production of basic grains in Guatemala accounted for by small farmers. For corn, he said it had been 95 per cent up to 1975, when a combination of shifting land on the south coast out of cotton and into corn production and the opening of newly cleared lands in the Pet6n had resulted in a lowering of this figure to about 80 per cent in the 1975 - 1976 agricultural year.

275. . Encuesta de Producci6n de Granos Basicos. INDECA­ dated Sept. 1975. UPE-260-75. El Pet6n. Questionnaire year TNDECA 2, During the 1975 - 1976 agricultural carried out a survey of basic grains production in the department of El Pet6n, using the same questionnaire as (274). Sample size: 4,430 cultivators. Numerpus problems were encountered and Celada considers the data obtained of doubtful reliability.

276. Roy A. Clifford and Erwin Flores J. Algunos Aspectos de las Migraciones de los Beneficiarios de Transformaci6n Agraria Me Guatemala. Guatemala: Instituto Interamoricano de Ciencias Agricolas (TICA), Direcci6n Regional para la Zona Norte, 1972. Study of beneficiaries of land redistribution based on data collected and supplied by the Departamento de Colonizaci6n y Desarrollo Agrario, Instituto Nacional de Transformaci6n Agraria (INTA), Guatemala.

277. y/nstituto de Nutrici6n de Cen t ro America y Panam& (IMCAP). rOficina de Investigaciones Interriacionales de lor Institutos i Nacionales de Salud (EEUU). Ministerio de Salud P6b].ica y Asistencia Social. Evaluaci6n Iutricional de la PoblnowiW do Centro Amrica y Panama: El Salvador. INCAP V-26. .p. 1969. Time frame: Sept. - Nov. 1965. Sample size: 3,231 individuals, or 1.1 per cent of the total, population of' El Salvador. "78 W,.ur Jir Vz blhn,C A 86. . IMovimientos Vipratoros Internos R(ga r~ao,: por c]. Cernso de 1950. Aumento de la Poblaci6n durante ]o Periodo Comprendido entre 1927 Y 1950. A study of migration in Costa Rica based on census data. 2'79. ."Esquema de la Evaluaci6n Demogrfia de Costa Rica. Revista do Estudios y Estadisticas (San Jos6), No. 1 (1961), PP. 5-14. 280. Richard N. Adams. Migraciones Internas en Guatemala; Expansi6n Agraria de los Indigenas Kekchles hacia Pet~n. Guatemala: El Centro Editorial "Jos6 de Pineda Ibarra," Ministerio de Educaci6n, 1965. 281. Richard P. Applebaum. San Ildefonso Ixtahuac~n, Guatemala: Un Estudio sobre la Migraci6n Temporal, Sus Causas y Conse­ cuencias. Guatemala: Seminario de Integraci6n Social Guatemalteca, 1967. Cuaderno 17. 282. Jorge Arias B. "Aspectos Demogr6ficos de la Poblaci6n Indigena de Guatemala." Boletin Estadistico (Guatemala, DGE), No. 1-2 (1959), pp. 18-38.

283. _ "Migraci6h Interna en Guatemala." Estadistica (Washington), Sept. 1962.

284. . "La Concentraci6n Urbana y las Migraciones Internas." Problemas do la Urbanizaci6n en Guatemala. Guatemala: Scminario de Integraci6n 19-45. Social Guatemalteca, 1965, pp.

285. Susan N. Oxnard. Expandin' Settlements in the Pacific Lowlands of Guatemala. Unpublished master's thesis Faculty of Political for Science, Columbia University, 1968. 286. Roy A. Clifford. El Estudio do la Situaci6n Social de la Comunidad Rural de Nueva Concepci6n, Guaemala. Guatemala: TICA, 1968. A confidential study of a large percelamiento about 35,000 inhabitants of using interviews with questionnaire done for the Guatemalan government. 287. Roy A. Clifford and Gregorio Alfaro. informe de la In­ vestijaci6n Preliminar SocioEcon6mica para el Piloto de Cooperativas Proyecto Rurales. San Jos: Banco Nacional de CosLa Rica, Publicaci6n No. 10, 1955. 288. Roy A. Clifford, Neptali Monterroso, and Francisco Vera L6poz. Estudio Sociol6rico de laFinca Sabana Grande, Departamento de Escuintla, Guatemala. Guatemala: ITCA, 1968. 87.

289. Comite Interamericano de Desarrollo Agrfcola (CIDA). Inventario de !a Informac i6n Hl pcak}ra a Prorramna c:.n del Desarrollo Agrlcola en la Amrica natina: Centroamoric. Washington: Pan American Union, 1965.

290. El Salvador. Instituto de Colonizaci6n Rural , Departamento Social. Estudio Socio-Econ6mi , HaciendaLa Reforma. San Salvador, 1966.

291. Humberto Flores . Las Migraciones Internan en Guatemala. Guatemala: Instituto Indigenis a, 1961. (Mi men)

292. Miguel Angel Funes C. Movimionto Micratorio. Honduras, March 1968. (Typescript)

293. Honduras. Instituto de Investigaciones Econ6mica, y Sociales. Tierras y Colonizaci6n. Tegucigalpa: Univerzi­ dad Nacional Aut6noma de Honduras, Facultad de Ciencias Econ6micas, 1961.

294. Charles P. Loomis and Reed M. Powell. "Sociametry Analysis of Class Status in Rural Costa Rica: A Peasant Community Compared with an Hacienda Community." Sociometry, 12.

295. Sanford. A. Mosk. "Economia Indigena en la Am6rica Latina." Cultura Indigena de Guatemala. Guatemala: Sominario de Integraci6n Social Guatemalteca, No. 1, 1959, pp. 67-99.

296. Raymond Stadelman. "Maize Cultivation in Northwestern * Guatemala." Contributions to American Anthropo.logy and History, VI (33), June 1, 1940, pp. 82-263.

297. M. Tosco etl. Anrovechamiento y Dominic de las Tierras er. 1950-51. Tegucigalpa: Banco Central y Banco Nacional de Fomento, 1951.

298. B. 0. Williams. The Subsistence Auriculture of Lake Yojoa1. Tegucigalpa, 1957.­

299. Oscar Arguedas Madrigal. Costos do Producc~in d Frijol en TreV Tivos do Siemlra en la Zona de Alaju._l.]a. Unpub­ lished thesis for the Faculty of Agronomy, Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala, 1971.

300. Jose Francisco Castillo Cajas. Estudio Econ6,ic (1 a Nano de Obra en la Finca Sabana Grande. Unpublished th.sis or the Faculty of Agronomy, Universidad de San Carlos do Guato­ mala, 1971.

301. Roberto Fonseca Robles. Estudio Econ6mio del Parcoinmi nto "Los Angeles"'. Unpublished thesis for the Faculty o Agronomy, Universidad de S;an Carlos do Guatemala, 1973. 30. Fl]av.i o Nodolfo Leal L6pez. Municipio de Cabricn Queza.l tnanno.ema ­ F rta y Grad(o 1e Desarrol]o '-ub-'(T!ema: Artezan.r±. Unpublished thesis for the Faculty of Economic Sciences, Universidad do 1973. San Carlos de Guatemala,

303. Meyer Solano ConeJo. Estudio Agro-Econ6mico de Un idad de Productor,. Una de Campesinos. Unpub].ished thesis for the Faculty of Agronomy, Universidad de Costa Rica, 1966.

304. Alvan O. Zarate. Principales Patrones de Migraci6n Interna en Guatemala, 1964. Guatemala: Seminario de Integraci6n Sccial Guatemalteca, 1967.

305. Alfred John Hagan. An Analysis of the Hand Weaving Sector of the Guatemalan Economy. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, 1970. A study based on interviews with owners and owner­ operators of artesanal weaving QI. firms using questionnaire.

306. Ridgway Satterthwaite. Campesino Agriculture and Hacienda Modernization in Coastal El Salvador: 1949 to 19 6 9.Unpublished dissertation, PY University of Wisconsin, 1971. 307; Lawrence H. Feldman. A Tumnlin6 Econom.: Production and Distribution Systems of Early Central-East Guatemala. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Pennsylvania State Unive-sity, 1971. 308. Gary lowland Smith. Income and Nutrition in the Guatemalan Highlands. Unpubli shed Ph.D. dissertation, Departmen~t of Economics, University of Orego.n, 19.72. The study states: "During the hnonths" of Oct.ober, and December November, 1969, and at various times during writer interviewed 1970, the a number of farmers in the Guatemalan Highlands departments of Chimaltenango and Sacatepequez. The purpose was to determine what systeamtic relationships exist between levels of per capita income and the consumed amount per capita of specific foods regularly members eaten by of farm families near the level of subsistence." QI. Sample size: 55.

309. Carlos O'b. Fonck. Modernity and Public Policies in the Context) of the Peasant Sector: Honduras Unpub]ished as a Case Study. Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University, A careful 1972. and innovative analysis based largely rural on the portions of the data contained in (170). major hypothesis The writer's is the following: "Significant political technical conflicts-,,sources and of social strain---can be identified by examining the characteristics of the peasant sector and of its linkages with other socio-economic strata in the light of the current agricultural policy. This hypothesis carries the assumption that the limits to agricultura] modernization are rmarily social, not physical or biological. .(p.-1 many 310. James Robert Taylor, Jr. Agrricult ural Ke t]1.eimnQt and Dcv elopment in lns torn ,ti ea ,x' ua. Uhp!i. :iled Ph.D. dissertation, University otF Wisconsin, 1968. A study based on int erviews with persons in 2' farm units in the Rama area, average per capita income $98.

311. Guatemala. Mini sterio de Salud PNbl ica. Directorate of Planning, Evaluation and Statistics. Unpublished dat a in files. These data include morbidity and mortality data from rural areas at municipio level.

312. Guatemala. Ministerio de Salud 1iblica. Paramedical auxiliaries perform a village survey as part of their training at the training school at Quirirui. and also survey the village they are assigned to on their arrival there. Consequently, there exists a body of dat-. in the files of the health centers, area chiefs, etc. of the ministry giving infrastructural data of a large number of villages.

313. Guatemala. Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnologn Acrrcolas ICTA). Secci6n de Socioeconomia Rural. Unpublished data. Information supplied by Dr. Peter Hildebrand. Since 1975, this section of ICTA has been building a wealth of information on small farmers in Guatemala. Tho basic purpose of the information is to allow ICTA to design cropping systems that stand a chance of being adopted by small farmers. For this purpose the data are of a micro nature and cover a wide range of socioeconomic variables. Method:.The focus is on the cropping system of the marginales, or marginal farmers. A team of the sect;ion arrives in a region with the purpose of making a sondeo, looking particularly for a traditional, relatively homo­ geneous agriculture manifested by existing cropping practices so as to get at a similar group of constraints in operation (e.g. resources, social barriers). This sondeo in effect serves to delimit the population to be investigated. From this population, a sample is selected. The ap­ proach is closer to the case study than the large-sample survey. Members of the team go through the entire cropping susson with individuals in the sample, noting down the prantices, calendar followed, etc. Why does the farmer do what he does? Is planting labor the most constraining factor? Or is he merely following tradition? The members use a questionnaire to elicit data, but try to keep Lheir talks with farpers informal, using a tape recorder, in some cases to 'reserve the farmer's own words without the formality of tiking notes on what he says. The data col.­ lected include'some on diet, and Hildebrand says the family's consunption of tortill.as and beans provides a good rough indicator. .90 . In a second phase, team members give the sample farmers a single sheeL containing data spaces to be fil led in ,making entries daily. ICTA summarizes Lhe recording sheets monthly, and tabulates them on a Crop by crop basis annually. A further source of information arc the records kept by the t~enicos who constitute ICTA's production teams. The focus is on improving productivity per man, and improving the productivity of labor used. in planting especially. The data are being tabulated manually and will appear in ICTA's reports and publications. It seems clear that ICTA's main emphasis is on the "subsistence" crops. Hildebrand says ICTA's sample estimates of production of there crops have compared favorably with INDECA's (see (274)), in the relatively few areas where ICTA has collected such data so far, Carl Koone, USAID/Guatemala, ranks ICTA's emphasis as follows: 1. corn and beans; 2. rice and sorghum, 3. vege­ tables and swine.

314. Catholic Relief Services (CRS) - U.S.C.C. Central American Reional Training Program for Workers in Preschool Feeding Prygrams. Part I. General Reu crt. 1972. This reports the results of a 1969 survey of the nutritional status of 820 children aged 6 months to 5 years who were from the worse-off sections and of a follow-up survey in 1970 of 468 of the same children, the data being recorded at feeding centers in Guatemala, Salvador, El Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama. Data cries include dietary information, medical histories, results of physical exams, clinical tests, and anthropo­ metric measurements (using INCAP standard weights as reference). Also Gomez classification. V

LOCATION OF PRITNTEhD SOURCES

91 92.

Biblioteca, DGEC, C. 2 A. 6, San Jos6. 7,9,10 USAID, RDO, San Jos. 11, 98,69, National Institutes of Hfealth, Rockville, Md. 20862; 21 ,277 and INCAP, Carretera Roosevelt, Zona 11, Guatemala. 12-16 USAID, RDO, San Jos6. 21,25,26 USAID, RDO, San Jose. 22-2h1 Biblioteca, IlCA, Turrialba. 27,28 MAG, San Jos6. 32-hh MAG, San Jose, 51-59 ITCO, San Jos6. 62 Office of Prof. Cespedes, Fac. Ecs., U. of C.R, San Jose. 65 IFAM, C. 1 A. 3, San Jos6. 66-68 MSP, San Jose. 17, 71 CELCA, San Jos6. 72-83 ACM, San Jose. 8h Office of Dr. Boynton, CATIE, Turrialba. 90-96 USAID, RDO, Managua. 99,101,124 DIPSA, Km. 12, Carretera Norte, Managua. 104 OCE, Managua. 97 INCEI, Managua. 106-109 USAID, Program Office, Managua. ii-ii MAG, Km. 12, Carretera Norte, Managua. 115 USAID, Education Office, Managua. 116 UASS, Managua. 98,.17,120-2 USAID, Public Health Office, Managua. 118 Dr. Hidalgo's office, MAG, Km. 12, Carretera Nc -c:, Man. 11.9 FUNDE, Managua. 123 USAID, Mr. H. Bustamente, Program Office, Managua. 125-129 DIGESTYC, Biblioteca, C. Arce 953, San Salvador. 130-131 MAG, DGEA, DEA, San Salvador. 132 USAID, Agriculture Office, San Salvador. 135-137 MAG, DGRD, San Salvador. 138 Dr. Cutie's office, U.Centroamericana Jos Sime6n Cafas, San Salvador. 139-140 IICA, San Salvador. 1 i Biblioteca, Fac. Ci. Agr., U. El Salvador, San Salvador. l142-1h6,1h8 USAID, Education Office, San Salvador. 147 DIGESTYC, San Salvador. 150 BFA, C. 6 Poniente A. 15 S., San Salvador. 151. MSPAS, OE, 15 A. Sur 114, San Salvador. 152-1514 USPHS, CDC, Atlanta. 155, 159-63 MAG, DGRD, San. Salvador. 156 BC, San Salvador. --I 57 58FC MAG, ,anOSPA, San Sal1vdor..Salvador.

'61165 CRS, San Salvador. 166 rTGESTYC, San Salvador. 167 Biblioteca, CONAPLAN, Casa Presidencial., San Salvador. 168 1MEN, D-S, DEAEA, Blvd. Toncontin, Edificio Desagro Casa No. 15314 (frente euracao), Comayaglela. 170 USAID, Health Office, Tegucigalpa. 171-5,179-87 DGEC, Comayagi ela. 178 ATAC, Banco Nacional 'de Fomento, 7th flr., Comayag~ela. 93. 176,177 DGEC, Biblioteca, Comayagicla. 189 PANI, 3 A. 4 C., Tegucigalpa. 190,191 TISE, ) C. 4+5 A. , Altos de la Urbana, Tegucigalpa. 193 CN, Tegucigalpa. 194-196 USAID, Education Office, Ave. La Paz, Tegucigalpa. 197-198 MRN, DPS, DASA, Blvd. Toncontin, Comayagiiela. 199 Office of P. Lucas, Edificio Jimenez Talavera, 2nd. fir., 8 A. 11+12 C., Conayaga6la. 201-204 MPII, DN, Tegucigalpa. 205 UNAH, Tegucigalpa. 206 USAID, Education Office, Tegucigalpa (typescript). 207 Casa Cural, Choluteca. 208 FUNHDESA, 4 C. );+5 A., Altos de la Urbana,,Tegucigalpa. 210-214 DGE, Dept. Censos y Encuestas, Aurora, Zona 13,Guatemala. 215 USAID, RDO, Office of Carl Koone, Guatemala. 216-18 INCAP, Carretera Roosevelt, Zona 11, Guatemala. 219 LTC, U.IWis. , Madison. 221 Office of T. Farrell, INCAP, Guatemala. 222-238 INCAP. 239 USAID, EDO, Office of Carl Koone, Guatemala. 240-241 DIGESA, 12 A. 19-01, Zona 1, Guatemala. 242 LA/DR, AID/Washington. 246-247 CNPE, Banco de Guatemala, Zona 1, Guatemala. 248,274-5 INDECA, 11 C. 3-23, Zona 9, Guatemala. 249-50 ROCAP Library, Guatemala. S251-256 DGE, Punto Focal Nacional, 8 A. 9-12, Zona 1, Guatemala. 258-261 ROCAP Library, Guatemala. 262-6 BVE, 2 A. 8-53, Zona 1, Guatemala. 267-273 DIGESA, 12 A. 19-01, Zona 1, Guatemala. 276-298 IICA, DRZN, 8 C. 1 A., Zona 9, Guatemala. 299-303 Biblioteca, Fac. Agronomla, U. San Carlos de G., Guateia.' , 305-310 ROCAP Library, Guatemala. 311-312 MSP, Guatemala. 313 ICTA, Sal6n Internacional, Zona 13, Guatemala. 314 CRS, 11 A. 31-86, Zona 5, Guatemala.

• J I Vi LOCATION OF DATA

94 95. t4,5 07 ,50 LADB , U. of F13 iq (comput.er haow) 85-118,007 it flI It 130-131 MAG, San 1v:d. ,r (I.t' jus: 't.atrt :in to coroe ifl f r o m I. i im n.',, y su,,r k, y v') . 9 AITEC, -,, Jo . 125 , 142-0126 ,66 29 , DTG;PT',q - San.. .a~r

135-6 MAG, San <',vadw. 150 Files, IPA', S.an Sa.l.vador. 152-h USY;oS, W O, .tlu n". 159 MAO, San Salvad,

177 LADB , U. o' Flor i .. 179,181-6 DGEC,

rc. stor

SOURCES OF DATA ON THE CONDITIONS

OF ESTATE AND PLANTATION WORKERS

96 97.

1. CamaraL Nar.c tli:nn d !',nuL cr," , ',tziCan Jua;C . . ''23 9l 2. Camara do Produvt.oves. dc. CNtfim d , Paci:f'ic",, San, J]o&( . ITe. 40~5i 0 3. Camara. , 'onal du Ca1',.tal , San O .I Tel. PmBPD'( 4. Camara de A;uc r ro' , Son J o s . i . .1 03 5. Asoci, n ]h:nanurnuP , u ' S.A. (ASBAN A)", Sa.n Jo:A

1. Compaihi, oalvado ea de CIN .. A. , 2 C. 0, " y 6 A. Sur,

2. Coopoerativa. Algudo ra1 >i vaaorteiha Limitad,, 7 A. Niorte 418, San Salvador.I 3. Cooperativs zuen.e ' ,vadorefa Ltd. , 9 A. Norte 2 2, San Sivador.

1. Asociaci6n Honduch, de Productores de CafM, 6 C. 10 A., Tegac 5 alp.

2. Asociac 6n Nac o-a! de C , , i.os }onurego . (ANACH), San Pedro Sulu. 3. Uni6n iNaciona..l do Ca...... 5 C. 2 A., To ucigalpa.

1. Asociaci6n a,-ion'l de C, -. ( A ACAFP),, Edi'icio Etisa, h fir., Plazuola Esaih a, Zonia 9, (uatemala. 2. Asociaci6n du do Gunatmnla,,ZucaCo. 12 C. A 2-h., Zona 1., Guate maa 3. See reference (220). VIII A NOTE ON DATA PROCESSING FACILITIES

93 99.

Costa Rica (as of Nov. 1975)

1. Direcci6n General de Estad'stica y Censos. a) IBM 1401 16 K 6 tape units. b) Anticipates arrival of excess property IBM l1101 12 K 2 tape units with console inquiry. c) DGEC will most certainly seek means to beef up above configuration to 16 K ($250/mo.) and 6 tape drives ($1,000/mo.). This would leave DGEC with two complete 1401 systems which would take care of their present and future needs into the 1980's. 2. Universidad de Costa Ri:za. a) IBM 360/40 392 K 14tape units various disc drives. b) According to UCR technicians there is very little time availablelfor outside work. c) IBM 1620. H 3. Ministerio de Hacienda. a) IBM 370/135 392 K 4 tape units 3330 disc drives remote terminal capacity to service the Ministerio de qpbernaci6n 's land titling function. b) At present time the computer is being used to maximum. 4. Instituto Intermericano de Ciencias Agrfcolas (IICA). a) IBM 1130 8 K with disc drives no tape units. 5. Banco Central a) IBM 401 12 K 4 tape units b) For 1976-77, IBM 370/115. 6. Instituto Nacional de Seguros. a) Same as for Banco Central. 7. Banco Nacional de Costa Rica. a) IBM 360/25 32 K with tape drives. 8. Banco de Costa Rica. a) Basic four. 9. Banco Credito Agricola de Cartago. a) Basic four.

Nicaragua

1. Direcci6n de Planificaci6n Sectorial Agropecuaria (DIPSA). Currently DIPSA uses the computer of the Ministerio de Haciends. This year DIPSA has a fixed-price agreement with IBM. Next year, DIPSA hopes to have its own computer. I was 1toldthat in three or four years DIPSA hopes to be processing all public sector information. A more important constraint at the present time than lack of computers is said to be lack of trained programmers. 100.

El Salvador 1. Direcci'n General de Estal'stica y Censos (DIGESTYC). a) IBM 'O0 2. Ministerio de Hacienda. a) IBM 360/30 64 K 4 disc drives, 2 magnetic 2401h, tape units 2 printers 1403N-1 and 1 printer 3. 2540. Instituto de eguro Social Salvadoreho. a) 380. 4. Ministerio de Educaci6n. a) H-P mini-computer and tape unit, high speed printer. 5. Universidad de El Salvador. a) H-P.

Honduras 1. Direcci6n General de Estadi'stica y Censos (DGEC). DGEC has its own (rather old) computer, adequate present purposes. for Census data are stored on punch or tapes, and cards are being transferred to discs.

Guatemala 1. Direcci6n General de Estad'stica (DGE). (as of June a) IBM 360/25 1975) with a disc operating system drives and four tape with channel selector. Assembler. Autocoder. RPG. Also adapter for 1401. b) Units of core: 32 K. c) Three trained and experienced full-time computer operators. d) Four trained and experienced full-time computer pro­ grammers. 2. Direcci6n General de Servicios Agrfcolas (DIGESA). a) DIGESA will get a tie-in with the Ministerio computer of the de Hacienda under a new agreement. 3. INCAP. a) 1620. This is described as inadequate. b) Expects to receive a H-P 3000 by June 1976 allow all which should data to be processed on site. Ix

A NOTJ' ON L N.D R.. I ST RY IN

CENT-RAL AME-RICA

101 102. The governments of the Central American still grappling countries are with the legacy left by three Spanish rule, centuries of the Spanish Crown and its replaced the colonists having communal land ownership of tants with a new system the original inhabi­ based on the concept of private perty (or, in the pro­ case of the Crown, Crown property). process and its resulting The confusion has been well described by David Browning as it occurred culminated in El Salvador, where it in the abolition of ejidal the speculative land in 1882 following rise in land values for The present coffee growing. state of land registry is chaotic Central American countries. in all the The situation has been described for Honduras in a recent agricultural sector assesrment by the USAID Mission there: "Compounding these problems . . . is the of deeds and titles in Honduras, chaotic system ;tenure with about fifteen types of imposed on top of the traditional public land Spanish private and grant system. According to familiar with cadaster experts Latin American land tenure and Honduras has probably title systems, the most inefficient and antiquated property registry thoroughly system in the hemisphere, lacking such basic items as an rarely index of the registry. Deed done, being regarded by registry is The many as an unnecessary foramlity. result is that scattered land in the invasions, as have occurred past few years, are almost impossi:le cie.Lar proof to resolve for lack of ,Df rights to the ownership or Even the GOH usufruct of the land. cannot precisely identify national lands that should be available and municipal for distribution under agrarian reform programs." This situation makes any attempt tenure records to deduce from the land in existence to the implications well-being relevant of socio-Lconomic to a poverty index hazardous. Honduras agricultural The first census (175), for instance, question on land tenure in its distinguished ejidal lands ejidal) from land owned (terreno in full title (terrenos propos), In the second agricultural census tenure, (174) a third form of land national land '(terrenos nacionales) The was distinguished. definitions given were as follows: "Terrenos ejidales "Los ejidos son terrenos solamente de propiedad del municipio y las municipalidades pueden disponer Cuando un vecino de los mismos. del lugar solicita a la municipalidad, permiso para usar una determinada se le concede parcela de terreno, la municipalidad mediante una constancia siempre y cuandolo concede dicho permiso estima conveniente; el solicitante el dominio util sobre dicho adquiere terreno, pero no puede venderlo hipotecarlo." ni "Terrenos nacionales • .son de propiedad terrenos a''las del Estado . . . -rersona o- s . El Estado da estos 1,03. As becomes evident from the census definitions, in Honduras national and ejidal lands are awarded under various types of leasing arrangements, including lifetime leases, and therefore the simple classification of land tenures according to three juridical categories fails to give an accurate idea of the actual degree of control over land. It follows that questions on land tenure, to have meaning for a rural poverty investigation, must be very carefully thought out. Even so, such data are based on personal declarations, and there may be interest on the part of the interviewee in concealing the actual state of tenure (particularly where there is a tax on agricultural land, as in Costa Rica). Moreover, concealed tenure under the well-known devices of having land registered under various relatives and friends of the actual owner operates here, as it does in India and elsewhere, further complicating the researcher's task. In none of the Central American countries do cadastral surveys provide complete coverage of the country at the present time.

F

" j x THE SIECA PROJECT LIST OF VARIABLES

104 A. ; :Qt AWC CIIC, A27 8

(ToCActc,,lil-trso~ ~ ~ A~strth Sept. 26, 1915)

2,1," Bvt

2.13 1~k !?r1.Ttin

2.1.4 U UfA~jonexpetancy1p~rT~ti

2.1.0 f~1'w-nand ~ i±~~Ao

2.2 10oT:1 VOnditftOuV In tkh rtu -n

2. 2.1 fl'x.a1 educition

2. p,2~w1opulnt'o L)~Ie thrQ

2. 2.1.3 1 n . Wovedlen sedriitio

2.~.,6 Rwca1ethcation

2.2,2 Nu4t,-it)on mid bwloth in tho iru*:,n n'xor

2.2,;.3. Qzd~tyof xv7.-ntvt

2.2.2.2 1>3ficrnclea . n ztz,3 nutcv:tllon (Caloy.ojXcifl

TNCLX1*XD A* ' .~ :. 'a~u~c:AU-4

Z2.2.a~~ K~~~CLAr

La~~u 3 3t 1e..-&i le urlgil eent(sse i lltho% '' t

1 Iiwcluo and CIL~ '0a IInoV11ri h 3 r.

3.1.1 Etnicr~ kntcth -, rurni, U.~Q.t

3, 1 -'iSttit~udl Fohft il thpn 1vo- r.jf4

* 3,,34 Vc~vccn positio) o~f pwfl2tnnt ov :3 3 nrd- Llszcr ttvc p"z rl:tux1 o~i A 1 1

4, .2. 2 ''V :Ve, r 'A t:P

4I 2

4.3,3.1~OV'v"ddd y .I1v". iIi;:..n';j L ~I,~), t CA;"I8 'CII-JIt,d" ;? ,

r( 71 3X: -Wd 3Y.Ct7* f

(r-) i . V2 a~r~C)'~t 111" t1y t-".xjr n/ctd£

tyj icr11 f ['nd 11:Thn n,. ~rc2-~t hi nd cC -,c

*~~ T,3Y)ttr2.1 V ur,n. c-

pl,A uvtrw noiAvv j !vi iAPQL

v~~~xi1 to Locrwtr~kN,tw 1 ~r~

'3cm i I; C)A 1 t iJ nc& .L Or

17c~ i.).

* dotexta.t!w;nl e*"r

7' C' 'A(v ic .,31

0) Z1

U,.Ci., ',t! n V), Jirnand pZartic~patillz _3p

p Il-)± 1.coj

,,n 7;:

91e1 af ~UtUos an not i(OVL'

c riiciy o Ok*Ocll C=1)O4-do orc o . i Itj ;o~ct op.'r

*5 c Jnti~o .

oX~In titivit io:;:1nve~w 01.

5.1f C2t3- II 7 nQ , C j , v2. toLl' o1. I At t n:c' t CcI~' ",C 2U P

5 1. G-2 In tho iid in r. k c

o52 til rgil

K c h~ z ycrj p v s,o~an

2.3 r~t incrch:.nr oT~ ~ ~ iv

a . 5,,4~ i~~r:~xrr f !~~ ~ w"hoto fu,!-pc tha4, uDicVck'-n o by -1 5. 2. 6v b uilrC­ 1~~

2. ~ 5 r: I i i x~2 n Z Cc 0't~/- 0,j 'Y 17

UC!A~IF;Ef

5..

*z t. FYh Ltv -uilt to CAiPRO (h A 2 ~CASFJD3 8

3,.3-3.1 Curucity O.Z mnlKmr,Obsorptic~m w'ithO~t toclbnological

5. It1U ~~ Z*e-flio~ ~ ~ 2 0- C.3,; 39gICUltural Plod~ction, W1301~, W-PlG)7nz:nt *ind iii 1pjayrf3vnt. ln the rmutt3. &rca SConvorntratlon of ogy~rutml.n1 vCptr I rnd itr, lnfh:-enco an ruranig~oyiment ond ilrorplynr't 5... Cisdtuyrzl can of crmp1oymglt And miroplownant In tbo

or *j ~).nore.rAI o

p ot~ ot Sal'or'l.0 In Varlous 2tructur- of prcAduct$.ci ag!'ieultual ('ree lahfave7D, ow-'l owners, liborers lrmrn oni lInge d~iiry 0)*d p1:lntD'UQQGr, lnbaiVC:'3 On ~ iensdProp~tion~ :!nd0 ~Iitb9 prativcs)o (CMm zao, vni~wo'j

5e3.5A. IngiticeC ruC0nr-4jz'36m.-i Inf the riiJl1 are~r onl

of 13J01 a-icjl*"'!r'ilnbror v. Th bo.,uox nn-ilo *riculturn1

5,3.7 ~ xom Irnnnd in mnntl~ry texmn vs. Inc~we In kindi, In

Y.I.

* ~~~~r101Y 2 ~'7 1 Srs. nn.c~2c±ilatonr --!ready uncko, v/9

2~0V~f P1~1 ;Zor th.3 !loIsi cotditiina 09 lile of zu~a1 men.

0Ul~1 J'S X,"71 ED